CRAVEN 
Answer  of  A.W.  Craven, 


Tf 
225 
N5 
C8 


ANSWER 


W.    CRAVEN, 


"JCT. 


('  II  A  U<i  KS 


ERNANDO    WOOD, 


MAYOR. 


,      .lul 


XEW      VOPJv: 
B  A  lv  ]•:  11     A-     (  i  (  )  D  W  IX,      ]'  It  |  X  T  I',  i:  S 


PRINTIVC   Ilnr-,K    S(^l    VI!K,     0]  ilAF.r., 

1860. 


ANSWER 


A.   W.    CRAVEN, 


CHIEF     ENGINEER    CROTQN   AQUEDUCT. 


CHARGES 


FERNANDO    WOOD, 


MAYOR. 


NEW      YORK,     July     31,     I860. 


NEW    YORK: 
BAKER    <fe    GODWIN,     PRINTERS 

PRINTING-HOUSE   SQUARE,    OPPOSITE    CITY   HALL, 

1860. 


CROTON  AQUEDUCT  DEPARTMENT,  ) 
OFFICE  OF  CHIEF  ENGINEER,      f 

July  31,  1860. 
To  the 

SPECIAL  COMMITTEE  OF  THE 

BOARD  OF  ALDERMEN: 
GENTLEMEN, — 

A  message  was  transmitted  to  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  by 
the  Mayor,  on  the  llth  instant,  in  which  he  says  : — 

"  In  consequence  of  serious  disagreements  and  insubordination,  I  hereby  re- 
move Alfred  W.  Craven  from  the  office  of  Engineer  of  the  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board,  and  Thomas  B.  Tappen  from  the  office  of  Assistant  Commissioner  of  the 
same  Board." 

In  the  use  of  this  language,  the  Mayor  appeared  to  forget 
that,  by  the  Charter,  he  had  no  power  to  remove  an  officer 
without  the  express  consent  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  nor 
without  cause.  The  message  proposed  to  remove  me  without 
the  consent  of  your  Board,  and  without  any  statement  of  facts, 
enabling  your  Board  to  determine  whether  the  "serious  disa- 
greements and  insubordination"  existed  in  fact,  or  whether,  if 
existing,  they  constituted  causes  for  removal. 

This  communication  having  failed  to  receive  the  approval 
of  your  Board,  the  Mayor  undertook  to  correct  his  error,  and, 
on  the  18th  inst,  transmitted  another  message,  in  which  he 
states  that  he  has  "  the  honor  of  submitting  some  additional 
reasons  for  these  removals,"  and  that  he  is  "  confident  they 
will  meet  with  the  prompt  endorsement  of  the  Board." 

These  two  messages  have  been  referred  by  the  Board  to 
you  as  a  special  committee,  and  I  have  to  thank  you  for  your 
courtesy  in  granting  my  urgent  request  for  a  full  investigation. 

Although  the  assurances  of  my  fellow  citizens,  constantly 
volunteered  in  numerous  gratifying  expressions,  might  seem  to 


warrant  my  treating  the  accusations  against  me  with  disdain,  I 
deem  that  this  very  confidence,  so  unreserved  and  so  kindly 
exhibited,  should  be  justified  and  rewarded  by  a  clear  and  per- 
fect statement  of  my  case.  I  cannot  but  feel  that  such  entire 
trust  in  my  integrity  when  it  is  thus  assailed,  demands  from 
me,  in  simple  gratitude,  that  I  should  show  it  is  not  misplaced. 

In  doing  so,  I  must  tax  the  patience  of  all  who  for  the  sake 
of  truth  will  read  or  listen  to  this  paper.  It  is  well  known  that 
a  falsehood  can  be  told  in  three  words,  which  it  will  take  three 
pages  to  disprove,  and  that  this  is  eminently  so  where  profes- 
sional and  technical  matters  are  concerned. 

I  will  examine  each  of  the  Mayor's  messages  fully  and  in 
detail.  In  order  to  do  so  fairly  and  frankly,  I  will  state  the 
charges  against  me  with  a  directness  which  he  has  failed  to  at- 
tain, and  will  unfold  the  covert  insinuations  with  which  they  are 
accompanied.  The  issue  is  not  simply  the  retention  of  my 
place — that  is  but  a  trifle  in  the  balance — the  issue  is  one  of 
character — of  private  and  official  integrity,  and  therefore,  to 
me,  of  life.  If  I  had  been  assailed  by  a  private  citizen,  I 
might  have  given  the  assault  such  a  degree  of  consequence  as 
his  personal  character  would  demand.  But  when  my  assailant 
happens  to  be  the  Mayor  of  the  city,  and,  from  his  public  posi- 
tion, embodies  his  attack  in  official  documents,  to  remain  on 
the  records  of  the  city  forever,  I  cannot  let  them  pass  in  silence 
or  contempt,  but  must  expose  and  confute  these  calumnies,  not 
only  for  my  own  sake,  but  for  the  sake  of  my  friends,  and  of 
all  men  who  appreciate  private  or  professional  character. 

CHARGES    OF  THE   MAYOR. 

The  charges  in  the  second  message  of  the  Mayor,  are  four 
in  number. 

First.  That  the  work  done,  and  the  work  remaining  to  be 
done  upon  the  new  Reservoir,  now  in  course  of  construction, 
largely  exceeds  the  original  estimate  of  such  work  made  by  me 
as  Chief  Engineer ;  that  the  quantities  of  such  work  in  vari- 
ous items  differ  from  the  estimate — some  being  largely  in- 
creased above,  and  some  very  largely  decreased  below  the 
original  estimate  ;  that  wherever  these  changes  have  occurred, 
they  have  proved  very  beneficial  to  the  contractors,  and 


largely  increased  the  cost  of  the  work  to  the  city,  with  the  cov- 
ert insinuation  that  the  changes  were  made  by  me,  because 
they  would  be  beneficial  to  the  contractors,  and  because  I  was 
acting  in  their  interests,  and  not  in  the  interest  of  the  city ; 
that  I  have  made  a  mistake  in  awarding  the  contract  to  the 
present  contractors,  whereby  the  city  will  suffer  loss  ;  that  I 
had  made  expensive  and  peculiar  changes  in  the  plans  of  the 
work,  whereby  its  cost  is  increased ;  that  I  have  been  wanting 
in  ability,  industry,  and  integrity,  whereby  the  interests  of 
the  city  have  been  sacrificed  ;  and  that  I  am  disqualified  for 
my  position,  and  some  other  person  more  competent  should  be 
appointed  in  my  place. 

Second.  That,  in  the  work  of  paving  Forty -ninth  Street 
from  Third  to  Lexington  Avenue,  with  trap  block,  the  Engin- 
eer did  not  exercise  proper  vigilance  ;  that  the  materials  em- 
ployed were  not  in  accordance  with  the  contract,  but  that  an 
inferior  quality  of  stone  was  used  ;  and  also  that  the  work  was 
performed  in  so  negligent  a  manner  as  to  cause  it  to  settle  in 
many  cases,  immediately  after  its  completion  ;  that  the  Croton 
Board  had  notice  of  the  defective  character  of  the  materials  em- 
ployed in  the  work,  but,  notwithstanding,  gave  a  certificate  of 
its  completion  and  acceptance. 

Third.  That  an  error  of  eight  inches  in  the  maximum  was 
made  in  the  grade  of  a  sewer  now  in  progress  in  Fortieth 
Street,  Ninth  Avenue,  Thirty-ninth  Street,  and  Eighth  Avenue, 
which  error  may  involve  the  city  in  litigation  and  loss,  and 
which  throws  a  serious  responsibility  on  the  Engineer  of  the 
Board,  showing  the  want  of  the  constant  care  and  entire  accu- 
racy demanded  of  one  to  whose  professional  skill  is  entrusted 
the  construction  of  important  public  works. 

Fourth.  That  John  Cornwell  and  William  Conboy,  em- 
ployes of  the  Department,  who  had  a  private  job  for  the  exca- 
vation of  a  cellar  at  Yorkville,  were  accused  before  the  Croton 
Aqueduct  Board,  in  December,  1859,  by  John  Chappel  and 
three  others,  to  the  effect  that  Cornwell  had  furnished  powder, 
fuse,  and  tools  belonging  to  the  Department,  to  aid  in  the  per- 
formance of  this  private  contract,  and  had  allowed  men  in  the 
service  of  the  Department,  and  under  his  supervision,  to  work 
upon  this  cellar,  and  had  fraudulently  returned  to  the  Depart- 
ment the  time  the  men  were  thus  engaged,  thus  causing  them 
to  be  paid  by  the  Department  for  labor  performed  on  private 
work  ;  that  notwithstanding  the  admission  of  Conboy  himself 
that  he  borrowed  powder,  fuse,  and  tools,  from  Cornwell,  both 


of  these  persons  are  yet  retained  in  the  service  of  the  Depart- 
ment ;  that  Mr.  Tappen,  the  then  acting  President,  and  myself, 
the  Chief  Engineer,  ought  to  have  had  them  indicted  for  con- 
verting the  public  property  to  their  own  use,  and  had  them 
excluded,  by  their  conviction,  from  ever  receiving  or  holding 
any  office  under  the  city  charter  ;  that  we  have  upheld  them 
in  despoiling  the  city — refused  to  invoke  the  most  decided  vin- 
dication of  the  law  against  them,  and,  by  keeping  them  in 
service,  have  subverted  "  the  good  faith  and  honesty"  of  the 
Department. 

Such  is  the  substance  of  the  reasons  for  which  you  are 
called  to  assist  in  removing  me  from  my  position  as  Chief  En- 
gineer of  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Board — a  position  which  I  have 
held  for  the  last  eleven  years  without  having,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware,  ever  incurred  the  slightest  suspicion  of  dereliction  in 
duty,  of  inability  to  discharge  the  responsible  labors  imposed 
upon  me,  or  of  want  of  fidelity  to  the  public  interests. 

I  shall  answer  them  in  the  order  in  which  they  are  above 
referred  to,  and  shall  in  doing  so  examine  somewhat  minutely 
the  various  items  of  each  charge. 

RESERVOIR. 

First, — As  to  the  Reservoir. 

Under  this  head,  in  order  to  have  the  whole  subject  thor- 
oughly understood  both  by  you  and  the  public,  I  am  obliged 
to  go  into  details  which  would  be  unnecessary  if  I  were  ad- 
dressing a  body  of  engineers. 

It  is  necessary  then  to  understand  what  this  Reservoir  is  to 
be — what  the  land  upon  which  it  is  constructed  originally  was 
— for  what  purpose  the  estimates  of  the  various  kinds  of  work 
upon  it  were  made — and  in  what  manner  we  arrived  at  the 
supposed  quantities  of  work  to  be  done. 

The  object  of  this  construction  is  to  obtain  space  for  im- 
pounding or  storing  a  sufficient  quantity  of  water  within  the 
city  limits,  and  in  immediate  connection  with  the  street  mains, 
to  supply  the  inhabitants  with  water  during  such  time  as  any 
repairs  to  the  main  aqueduct  or  conduit  of  masonry  make  it 
necessary  to  shut  off  the  usual  daily  flow  into  the  city.  The 
present  Reservoirs  are  insufficient  for  this  purpose.  The  amount 
stored  in  them  is  so  small  compared  with  the  daily  consump- 
tion, that  we  are  unable  to  keep  the  water  shut  off  during  a 


greater  period  than  seventy  hours  at  a  time,  whatever  repairs 
may  be  necessary — while  the  condition  of  some  parts  of  the 
aqueduct  is  such,  that  the  necessity  for  more  thorough  ex- 
amination and  repair  than  can  be  done  in  that  period, 
is  steadily  becoming  more  pressing.  This  subject  engaged 
my  attention  almost  immediately  after  my  original  appoint- 
ment as  Engineer,  and  foreseeing  the  importance  of  the  early 
completion  of  this  work,  I  urged  forward,  as  far  as  lay  in 
my  power,  the  legislative  steps  necessary  for  its  commence- 
ment. The  property  selected  for  its  site  was  not,  however, 
obtained  until  1856,  and  the  appropriation  for  its  construction 
was  not  made  by  the  legislature  until  1857.  The  site  lies  be- 
tween 85th  and  97th  streets,  and  between  5th  and  8th  avenues, 
embracing  an  area  of  106  acres,  and  although  situated  at  consid- 
erable height  above  the  level  of  tide  water,  the  centre  of  it  was  a 
natural  basin  surrounded  by  land  and  rocks  of  various  degrees  of 
elevation.  This  basin  was  a  swamp  or  morass,  covered  more 
or  less  with  water,  and  rendered  difficult  of  accurate  examina- 
tion by  the  thicket  which  covered  the  surface  and  filled  the  soil 
with  its  matted  roots.  The  charter  of  the  city  required  that 
this,  like  all  other  similar  work,  should  be  done  by  contract, 
and  be  awarded  to  the  lowest  bidder  without  any  distinction— and 
the  established  practice  of  the  Federal,  State,  and  City  Gov- 
ernments does  not  permit  that  work  of  this  kind  should  be  let  or 
taken  in  solido,  or  by  the  lump.  The  practice  requires  that  an 
estimate  should  be  formed  of  the  relative  quantity  of  each  item 
or  kind  of  work  and  material  to  be  employed  in  the  entire  con- 
struction, and  that  contractors  should  bid  a  certain  rate  or  price 
for  each  item  or  kind.  Such  rates  or  prices,  multiplied  by  the 
estimated  quantities,  would  give  the  total  result  of  each 
bid — and  a  comparison  of  such  totals  would  determine 
who  was  by  the  law,  the  lowest  bidder.  The  undertaking  of 
the  work  was  not  dependent  on  its  cost.  The  Keservoir  was  a 
necessity,  and  would  have  been  ordered  by  the  city  even  had 
the  original  estimate  of  its  cost  been  double  what  it  was.  But 
even  had  the  undertaking  been  dependent  on  its  cost,  so  long 
as  the  government  was  not  deceived  by  my  estimate  of  the 
total  cost  (which  I  shall  clearly  show  hereafter),  minute  exact- 
itude in  the  relative  proportions  of  the  different  quantities  making 


8 

this  total  cost,  was  not  indispensably  necessary  for  the  purpose  of 
letting  the  work.  It  was  desirable  that  they  should  be  as 
exact  as  it  was  possible  to  determine  ;  but  as  each  contractor 
would  bid  upon  the  same  estimate  of  quantities,  and  the  real 
object  was  simply  to  ascertain,  in  obedience  to  the  charter,  who 
was  the  lowest  bidder  upon  a  supposed  basis,  it  is  clear  that 
when  the  estimate  was  made,  the  bidders  stood  equal  and  upon 
the  same  footing  with  each  other. 

But  how  was  even  a  probable  estimate  of  each  kind  or  item 
of  work  and  materials  required  for  the  total  construction,  to  be 
ascertained  ?  The  surface  of  the  entire  area  of  106  acres  could 
be  seen  with  the  naked  eye.  In  many  cases  the  surface  gives 
indications  of  what  will  be  found  underneath.  But  this  area 
of  land  was  peculiar,  as  I  have  before  described  it — and  who 
could  tell  what  would  l)e  found  beneath  its  surface  ?  how  much 
solid  rock  ?  what  kinds  of  rock  ?  how  much  earth  ?  what  kinds 
of  earth  ?  how  much  of  the  materials,  either  of  earth  or  rock, 
would  be  fit  to  use  in  the  construction  ?  Engineers  have  no 
more  power  of  subterranean  insight  than  ordinary  men.  We 
did  the  only  thing  practicable  in  such  cases.  We  examined 
with  unusual  care  the  entire  surface,  and  by  excavations  in 
some  places,  and  the  use  of  iron  "  sounding  rods  "  at  very  short 
distances  apart  over  the  entire  area,  we  arrived  at  an  approxi- 
mate result.  Our  borings  with  the  rod  were  carried  down  as 
far  as  possible,  sometimes  reaching  to  the  depth  of  thirty  feet ; 
but  these  soundings  could  not  always  be  relied  upon  with  en- 
tire certainty.  In  some  cases  the  rod  might  strike  a  rock 
which  would  indicate  the  solid  ledge,  but  which,  upon  the  devel- 
opment of  the  work,  would  prove  to  be  simply  a  large  boulder, 
or  else  an  upward  projecting  point  far  above  the  general  level  of 
the  ledge.  So  also  with  the  kinds  of  rock  and  the  kinds  of  earth, 
no  data  could  be  given  which  would  be  entirely  reliable. 
The  officer  in  immediate  charge  of  these  examinations  was 
the  present  efficient  engineer  of  the  work,  Captain  George 
S.  Greene,  late  of  the  U.  S.  Army,  and  for  some  years 
Professor  of  Mathematics  and  Engineering  at  West  Point 
Academy.  A  more  thorough  investigator  or  more  upright  man 
can  nowhere  be  found.  And  I  assert  confidently  that  a 
closer  approximation  to  the  real  quantities,  as  developed  in  the 


9 

construction  of  this  work,  could  not  have  been  made  on  this 
piece  of  ground,  unless  at  au  expense  which  would  be  en- 
tirely unwarrantable.  We  did  not  therefore  expect  to  obtain 
a  result  showing  the  actual  number  of  yards  of  excavation, 
whether  of  earth  or  of  rock,  or  the  precise  character  and 
proportions  of  the  materials  which  the  site  of  the  proposed 
reservoir  contained.  We  simply  expected  to  obtain  data 
which  would  enable  the  contractors  competing  for  the  work  to 
form  some  judgment  ot  its  requirements  and  its  cost,  and 
thus  put  them  on  an  equal  footing,  and  further  to  enable  me 
to  give  to  our  Board  my  own  views  of  its  probable  total  cost. 
The  examinations  resulted  in  the  following  estimate  of  quanti- 
ties : — I  quote  from  the  specifications. 


"  (81.)  Quantities  estimated  for  the  construction  of  the  work,  on  -which  the 
comparisons  of  bids  will  be  made. 

*  E.  792,519  cubic  yards  of  excavation,  composed  as  follows,  viz:  63,304 
cubic  yards  of  soil  and  other  materials  not  suitable  for  the 
construction  of  embankment,  to  be  placed  in  spoil  banks, 
within  the  space  mentioned  in  specification  (1),  (of  which 
17,362  cubic  yards  will  be  placed  on  the  outer  slopes  of  the 
banks) ;  and  25,000  cubic  yards  of  excavation  from  the  pud- 
dle ditches,  to  be  placed  in  embankment  or  spoil  bank  ; 
704,215  cubic  yards  of  excavation  for  puddle  and  embank- 
ments. 

F.  284,894  cubic  yards  of  rock  excavation. 

G.  78,988  cubic  yards  of  puddle  in  the  ditches  and  embankment. 

H.  642,589  cubic  yards  of  embankment,  exclusive  of  the  puddle  bank. 

I.  20,938  cubic  yards  of  broken  stone  lining  of  inner  slopes. 

K.  47,111  cubic  yards  of  stone  paving  or  slope  wall. 
K1.       2,009  cubic  yards  of  paving  laid  in  cement. 
0.  555  cubic  yards  of  brick  wall,  laid  in  cement. 

P.  833  cubic  yards  of  concrete  on  the  middle  bank. 

Q.  54,000  square  feet  (superficial  measure)  of  sheet  piling." 

At  the  same  time,  being  aware  of  the  uncertainty  of  any 
quantitative  estimate  in  a  case  of  this  description,  and  being 
desirous  on  the  one  hand  that  the  city  should  be  guarded 
against  extra  claims,  and  that  on  the  other  hand,  no  competitor 
for  the  work  should  be  misled,  the  following  clause  was  inserted 
in  the  proposals,  and  immediately  following  the  estimate  of 
quantities : — 


10 

"  Other  quantities,  dependent  on  developments  in  the  progress  of  the  work, 
are  not  estimated.  The  foregoing  are  the  quantities  which  have  been  estimated, 
approximately,  for  the  construction  of  the  work ;  they  form,  however,  no  part  of 
the  contract,  and  persons  bidding  are  cautioned,  that  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Board 
do  not  hold  themselves  responsible  that  any  of  them  shall  strictly  obtain  in  the 
construction  of  the  work,  and  the  contractors  are  required  to  examine  the  plans 
and  the  ground,  and  to  judge  for  themselves,  as  well  of  the  quantity,  as  the 
distance  of  haul,  and  other  circumstances  affecting  the  cost  of  the  work,  and  to 
make  their  bids  for  each  item  independent.of  others,  so  far  as  relative  quantities 
are  concerned." 

The  above  clause  was  also  included  in  the  contract  and 
specifications. 

The  proposals  having  been  advertised,  bids  were  received 
on  all  the  items  of  work  and  materials,  from  seventeen  dift'er- 
ent  individuals  or  firms.  The  bids  were  so  much  per  foot  or 
per  yard  for  each  item,  and  multiplied  by  the  estimated  quanti- 
ties resulted  in  totals  varying  from  $614,001  97  to  $1,914,730  46. 
And  this  extraordinary  difference  in  the  totals  was  not  greater 
than  the  rates  or  prices  for  which  the  different  competitors  pro- 
posed to  perform  the  various  items  of  the  work — showing  con- 
clusively, what  in  practice  is  well  known,  that  the  price  or  rate 
at  which  a  contractor  is  willing  to  do  one  portion  of  a  large 
work,  is  no  evidence  that  such  rate  or  price  is  considered  by 
him  to  be  remunerative.  They  frequently  propose  to  lose  by 
some  portions  of  the  work,  and  to  make  up  the  loss  by  the  price 
or  rate  which  they  will  obtain  for  other  portions. 

The  contract  was  awarded  in  the  summer  of  1857,  by  our 
full  Board  and  the  Comptroller  of  the  city,  to  Fairchild  &  Co. ; 
the  law  requiring  such  award  to  them  as  the  lowest  bidders 
complying  with  the  ordinances  prescribing  the  form  of  making 
bids.  The  total  of  their  bid  was  $632,473  33  ;  that  of  the  next 
highest  bidders  (Cummings  &  Co.)  was  $729,807  25.  The 
contract  was  not  confirmed  by  the  Common  Council  until  the 
spring  of  1858. 

With  these  general  explanations,  I  now  proceed  to  the  first 
subdivision  of  the  Mayor's  general  charge  in  regard  to  the 
Reservoir.  On  the  2d  of  May,  we  furnished  him  at  his  request, 
a  table  showing  the  quantities  of  work  already  done,  and  com- 
paring them  with  the  estimate  ;  but  without  asking  from  us 
one  word  of  explanation,  he  sends  in  his  message  of  July  18th, 


11 

in  which  he  states  that  the  following  remarkable  discrepancies 
appear  between  the  work  as  done  and  as  estimated. 

INCREASE   OF   EXCAVATION. 

First.  "  That  the  excavation  has  been  increased  from  thirty 
to  sixty  thousand  cubic  yards,  or  7  .per  cent." 

I  have  shown  you  the  inherent  difficulty  in  forming  a  close 
quantitative  estimate  for  such  a  work  on  such  ground,  and  the 
strong  probability  that  the  quantities  would  not  be  verified  by 
the  actual  progress  of  the  work.  I  have  shown  you  that  my 
experience  enabled  me  to  foresee  these  contingencies,  and  that 
I  did  foresee  and  did  provide  against  extra  claims  against  the 
city,  by  the  warning  to  the  contractors  and  the  express  stipula- 
tions of  the  contract  itself.  I  will  now  show  you,  under  each 
head,  the  special  cause  for  such  discrepancies,  and  I  shall  then 
leave  you  to  determine  whether  it  is  fair  or  manly  to  say  of 
them,  with  obvious  obliquity,  and  without  asking  a  word  of 
explanation,  that  they  are  "remarkable." 

The  exact  quantity  of  excavation  is  even  now  a  matter  of 
conjecture ;  but  whether  it  will  involve  an  increase  of  7  per 
cent,  or  not,  it  is  nevertheless  true,  that  it  will  be  considerably 
in  excess  of  the  amount  as  originally  estimated.  The  rea- 
sons for  such  increase  are  these  : 

REASONS   FOR   INCREASE   OF   EXCAVATION. 

First.  When  the  work  was  commenced,  the  more  depressed 
portions  of  the  site  of  the  Reservoir  were  very  wet.  To  render  it 
fit  to  receive  the  embankments,  and  also  to  enable  us  to  pro- 
cure by  excavation,  proper  material  for  those  embankments,  it 
was  necessary  to  make  large  ditches  through  the  site  of  the 
Reservoir  to  draw  off  the  water. 

This,  of  course,  increased  the  excavation  ;  that  is  to  say,  in- 
creased it  to  the  extent  of  the  number  of  cubic  yards  of  excava- 
tion which  each  ditch  contained. 

Second.  The  material  thus  excavated,  instead  of  being  car- 
ried directly  into  embankments,  was  necessarily  collected  in 
temporary  places  of  deposit.  "When  the  ground  was  suffi- 
ciently drained  to  permit  the  construction  of  embankment,  it 


12 

was  necessary  to  remove  the  material  from  these  tempo- 
rary banks  to  permanent  embankments,  thus  involving  a 
double  excavation.  The  work  upon  the  Reservoir  was  com- 
menced in  the  spring  of  the  year  1858,  when  the  ground  was 
wet  from  the  melting  of  the  snow  and  from  the  spring  rains  ; 
and  far  greater  difficulty  was  experienced  on  this  account  than 
would  have  been  the  case,  if  the  contractors  could  have  entered 
upon  it  early  in  September,  1857,  as  was  anticipated  at  the 
time  the  estimate  was  made  and  the  contract  awarded. 

The  Common  Council,  however,  did  not  confirm  the 
award  of  the  contract  soon  enough  to  enable  the  contractors 
to  commence  the  work  at  that  time. 

Third.  Upon  excavating,  it  was  found  that  in  many  places 
the  earth  was  not  of  proper  quality  for  embankment,  and  the 
contractors  were  obliged  to  dig  much  lower  in  the  site  of  the 
bottom  of  the  Reservoir  than  was  anticipated,  to  obtain  earth, 
which  was  suitable. 

The  contractors,  it  will  be  seen  by  a  reference  to  the  first 
section  of  the  contract,  were  bound  to  take  their  materials  for 
the  construction  of  the  Reservoir  from  the  ground,  if  they  could 
be  obtained  ;  and  if  they  could  not  be  obtained  upon  the  ground, 
they  were  entitled  to  charge,  for  such  of  the  materials  as  they 
procured  from  other  sources,  a  price  additional  to  that  agreed 
upon  in  the  contract  for  similar  kinds  of  materials  found  within 
the  lines  of  the  Reservoir. 

It  was,  therefore,  to  the  interest  of  the  city,  that  materials 
should,  if  possible,  be  obtained  from  the  Reservoir  grounds, 
and  it  was  to  prevent  an  increase  in  the  price  of  the  materials 
necessary  for  embankment,  that  I  directed  the  increased  exca- 
vation to  be  made  within  our  grounds. 

It  was  foreseen  that  this  difficulty  might  arise,  and  a  pro- 
vision was  inserted  in  the  10th  section  of  the  specifications  to 
this  effect : 


"(10.)  The  earth,  within  the  working  lines  of  the  interior  slopes  of  the  basins, 
will  be  excavated  to  the  depth  of  forty  feet  below  the  top  of  the  exterior  Reservoir 
banks,  and  as  much  lower  as  may  be  required  by  the  engineer,  to  obtain  materials  for 
the  embankments  or  for  the  puddling.  The  surface  of  the  bottom  of  both  basins  to 


13 

be  worked  to  the  same  depth,  and  to  such  slopes  as  the  engineer  may  direct.  The 
exact  depth  cannot  be  determined  until  the  surface  of  the  rock  is  uncovered. 
Whenever  it  may  be  necessary  to  go  below  the  bottom  of  the  Reservoir,  as  it  shall 
be  established  by  the  engineer,  to  obtain  materials  for  embankment  or  for  puddle, 
the  space  so  excavated  shall  be  filled  up  with  such  waste  materials  as  the  engineer 
may  direct." 

Here,  it  is  shown  that  we  were  fully  authorized  by  the  con- 
tract to  order  an  increase  in  the  excavation,  should  it  become 
necessary  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  materials  for  embank- 
ment. The  necessity  did  arise,  and  the  excavation  was 
materially  increased  thereby.  The  pecuniary  advantage  ac- 
cruing to  the  city  (not  the  contractors)  by  the  order  to  obtain 
the  required  quantity  of  material  from  within  the  limits  of  the 
Reservoir  will  at  once  be  perceived  by  referring  to  the  Con- 
tract. Section 

"  (E.)  For  all  excavation,  whether  hardpan,  quicksand,  stones,  boulders,  or 
otherwise,  excepting  solid  rock  which  requires  blasting,  and  excepting  boulders 
more  than  half  a  cubic  yard  in  capacity,  and  for  disposing  the  materials  accord- 
ing to  the  specifications  in  spoil  bank,  or  in  refilling  excavations  made  to  obtain 
materials,  or  embankments,  or  puddle  bank,  or  puddle,  to  be  measured  in  exca- 
vation, twenty-one  (21)  cents  per  cubic  yard. 

"(II.)  For  embankments,  including  the  soil  one  foot  in  depth  on  the  outer 
slopes  and  exclusive  of  all  puddle  and  all  masonry  and  broken  stone  on  the 
slopes,  in  addition  to  the  price  paid  for  excavation  in  item  E,  or  for  furnishing 
materials  in  item  N,  when  the  engineer  may  direct,  materials  to  be  furnished 
from  outside  the  Reservoir  ground,  to  be  measured  in  embankment,  one  (1)  cent 
per  cubic  yard. 

"(N.)  For  earth  to  be  furnished  for  embankment,  should  the  engineer  direct 
any  to  be  obtained  beyond  or  outside  of  the  Reservoir  ground,  in  addition  to 
the  price  paid  for  embankment  in  item  H,  to  be  measured  in  embankment,  fifty 
(50)  cents  per  cubic  yard." 

That  is  to  say :  If  the  earth  for  the  embankment  were  fur- 
nished from  within  the  Reservoir  grounds,  the  contractors,  for 
excavating  and  putting  it  in  bank,  were  to  receive  22  cents  per 
cubic  yard  ;  if  obtained  from  other  sources,  they  were  to  receive 
51  cents  per  cubic  yard  for  it. 

4th.  The  nature  of  the  Rock  encountered  in  the  actual 
working,  materially  added  to  the  amount  of  rock  excavation 
as  originally  estimated.  In  many  places  the  rock  was  found 
to  be  of  a  porous,  friable  character,  full  of  cracks  and  fissures, 


14 

and  utterly  unfit  for  the  base  of  the  puddle  trench.      This 
contingency  was  also  provided  for. 

The  12th  section  of  the  specifications  in  the  contract  con- 
tained this  provision  : — 

"  When  any  fissures,  seams,  or  soft  rock,  are  found  within  the  basin  of  the 
Reservoir,  or  under  the  banks  thereof,  the  rock  is  to  be  excavated  to  such  extent 
as  the  engineer  may  direct,  and  the  space  filled  with  concrete,  puddle,  earth,  or 
sand,  as  may  be  required  by  the  engineer." 

It  will  be  apparent  from  the  above,  that  not  only  was  our 
Board  authorized  to  carry  out  these  portions  of  the  contract 
providing  for  this  method  of  prosecuting  the  excavation,  but 
that  my  duty,  as  an  engineer,  left  me  no  alternative  but  to  avail 
myself  of  the  provisions  made  in  the  contract  for  this  express 
purpose. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  the  second  spe- 
cification of  the  Mayor's  charge,  under  the  head  of  the  Reser- 
voir. 

INCREASE   OF   PUDDLE. 

2d.  "  That  the  puddle  has  been  increased  by  an  amount  of  twenty-five  or 
thirty  thousand  cubic  yards,  or  thirty-seven  per  cent." 

Before  entering  upon  this  subject,  I  will  briefly  describe 
what  "  puddle  "  is  : 

A  "puddle  trench'1''  or  "  watt"  is  a  space  in  the  centre  of  the 
embankment  which  surrounds  the  Reservoir.  It  is  made  of 
mixed  materials  (earth,  clay,  and  sand)  worked  together  care- 
fully with  spades  while  wet.  Properly  made,  it  is  impervious 
to  water,  and  is  the  barrier  on  which  we  rely  to  prevent  the 
banks  from  leaking.  The  embankment  alone  cannot  be  de- 
pended on  for  this  purpose.  Although  in  some  degree  water- 
tight, the  main  function  of  the  embankment,  exclusive  of  the 
"puddle,"  is  to  resist  the  lateral  thrust  of  the  impounded 
water.  Below  the  base  of  the  embankment,  the  space  for  this 
puddle  is  carried,  in  the  form  of  a  trench,  to  the  solid  rock. 
Above  the  base  of  the  embankment  it  is  carried  up,  or  con- 
structed, at  the  same  time  with  the  embankment,  and  it  is  then 
sometimes  called  a  " puddle  wall"  If  the  embankment  rests 
on,  or  starts  from  ordinary  earth,  and  the  puddle  trench  is  not 
carried  down  to  the  rock,  the  water  will  pass  through  the  earth 


15 

below  the  puddle  wall,  and  thus  escape.  To  ensure  perfect 
work,  therefore,  it  is  better  to  carry  the  puddle  trench  down  to 
the  rock  in  all  cases  where  it  can  be  reached,  within  available 
distance,  unless,  indeed,  the  earth  on  which  the  embankment 
rests  is  in  itself  impervious  to  water.  In  the  new  Reservoir 
the  water  will  be  enclosed  by  a  puddle  wall,  resting  upon  the 
solid  rock  throughout  its  entire  length.  At  no  one  point,  there- 
fore, can  the  embankment  leak. 

With  these  explanations  and  remarks,  I  will  proceed  to 
the 

CAUSES   OF   INCREASE   IN   PUDDLE. 

1st.  The  porousness  and  friability  of  the  subterranean  rock 
encountered  in  the  puddle  trenches,  which,  as  I  have  above 
shown,  caused  an  increase  in  the  rock  excavation,  produced 
necessarily  a  corresponding  increase  in  the  puddle.  In  many 
cases  the  fissures  and  holes  in  the  rock  rendered  it  utterly  unfit 
for  the  bed  or  base  of  a  puddle  trench,  and  the  contractors 
were  required,  in  such  cases,  to  continue  their  excavation  until 
they  reached  a  bed  of  solid  rock  which  was  suitable  for  this 
purpose.  This,  of  course,  produced  both  an  increase  of  exca- 
vation and  of  puddle.  The  deeper  the  excavation  for  the  pud- 
dle trench,  the  greater  the  amount  of  puddle  required  to  fill  it. 

2d.  In  sounding  the  ground  for  estimates  of  quantities  with 
the  iron  rods  used  for  such  purposes,  an  engineer  is  frequently 
deceived  as  to  the  amount  of  rock  contained  in  the  ground, 
from  the  fact  of  the  rod  happening  to  strike  upon  a  boulder  or 
a  point  of  rock  which  appears  to  be  the  main  ledge.  This 
occurred  in  our  examinations.  Upon  excavating,  it  was  found, 
in  many  instances,  that  where  solid  rock  was  presumed  to 
exist,  the  engineer's  sounding  rod  had  been  stopped  by  a  boul- 
der or  by  an  upward  projecting  point  of  rock,  and  that  the 
main  ledge  was  far  below  the  level  indicated  by  the  rod. 

In  some  such  instances  we  were  obliged  to  go  ten  feet 
deeper  to  reach  the  main  ledge  of  rock.  Under  the  southern 
bank,  we  were  compelled,  by  the  character  of  the  rock,  after 
reaching  the  ledge,  to  excavate  through  it  twenty  feet  further 
to  get  down  to  a  bed  which  was  proper  for  the  puddle  The 
additional  excavation,  both  of  earth  and  rock  (and  the  conse- 
quent increase  of  puddle),  owing  to  these  causes,  under  the 


16 

western  bank  through  the  swamp,  was  exceedingly  great,  the 
character  of  the  natural  earth  requiring  its  entire  removal  for 
a  width  equal  to  half  the  width  of  the  base  of  the  embankment. 
This  excavation  extended  down  to  the  rock,  and  the  space  was 
filled  up  with  puddle — a  proper  and  justifiable  arrangement  of 
materials. 

By  section  (7)  of  the  specifications  and  contract,  you  will 
see  that  the  contingency  of  increase  in  this  particular  also,  was 
foreseen  and  provided  for. 

"(7.)  Puddle  ditches  are  to  be  excavated  to  the  rock  under  the  centre  of  all 
the  embankments,  where  the  rock  is  not  lower  than  forty-six  feet  below  the  top 
of  the  exterior  Reservoir  bank:  and  in  any  loose,  broken,  soft,  or  porous  rock,  the 
ditches  mil  be  excavated  to  such  depth  as  the  engineer  may  direct." 

So  much  for  increase  of  puddle. 

DECREASE   IN   EMBANKMENT. 

The  3d  subdivision  of  the  Mayor's  1st  charge  is : — 

"  That  the  embankment  has  been  decreased  by  an  amount  of  215,565  cubic 
yards,  or  one-third  less." 

The  reasons  for  this  decrease  are  these : — 

1st.  From  the  apparent  nature  of  the  ground  it  was  in  many 
places  uncertain  how  far  we  should  have  to  go,  below  the  natu- 
ral surface,  to  find  good  material  for  the  bed  of  an  embankment. 
A  large  allowance  was  made  for  this,  and  provision  made  in 
the  specifications  for  decrease,  should  it  be  found  advisable. 
As  our  work  was  developed,  it  was  found  that  at  certain  parts 
of  the  work  we  should  not  be  obliged  to  go  to  such  depth  for 
a  proper  bed  as  we  anticipated,  and  for  which  depth  we  very 
properly  had  made  an  estimate.  Less  embankment  was  there- 
fore necessary — but  for  the  same  reason  less  excavation  was 
required;  first,  the  excavation  required  to  go  down  to  the 
proper  bed  for  the  embankment ;  and,  second,  the  excavation 
necessary  to  obtain  materials  to  make  the  embankment,  had  it 
(the  embankment)  not  been  thus  decreased.  As  a  yard  of  ex- 
cavated earth  will  not  make  a  yard  of  compacted  embankment, 
the  saving  or  decrease  of  excavation  by  this  development  was 
more  than  twofold  the  amount  of  decrease  in  the  embankment. 


17 

Thus,  a  large  amount  was  in  reality  saved  to  the  city ;  and  if 
the  price  for  excavation  in  the  contract  was  a  remunerative 
one  (which,  notwithstanding  the  assumption  of  the*Mayor,  does 
not  appear),  this  development  or  so-called  "  change"  was  greatly 
against  the  interests  of  the  contractor. 

2d.  Another  reason  for  decrease  is  in  the  embankment  yet 
to  be  done,  and  it  is  this  :  A  road  now  contemplated  by  the 
Central  Park  Commissioners,  around  the  Reservoir,  enables  us 
to  fill  against  the  outer  slopes  of  our  banks  with  waste  mate- 
rials out  to  a  level  with  their  road,  instead  of  covering  these 
slopes  from  top  to  base  with  a  foot  of  selected  soil  for  a  turf 
protection  to  said  slopes.  The  amount  of  this  soil  was  origin- 
ally included  in  the  comparative  estimate,  as  embankment. 

STONE   PAVING   AND   PAVING   IN   CEMENT. 

The  4th  and  5th  subdivisions  of  the  Mayor's  first  charge 
are  as  follows  : 

"  Fourth. — That  the  stone  paving  has  been  decreased  by 
an  amount  of  46,911  cubic  yards,  or  ^  only  of  the  original 
amount. 

"Fifth. — That  the  paving  in  cement  has  been  increased 
by  an  amount  of  18,867  cubic  yards,  or  more  than  nine  times 
greater." 

SEASONS. 

Inasmuch  as  the  decrease  in  the  dry  slope  wall,  or  what  is 
designated  in  the  contract  as  the  "  stone  paving"  arose  from 
the  same  cause  which  increased  the  amount  of  the  paving  in 
cement,  I  shall  answer  these  two  subdivisions  together. 

The  increase  in  the  paving  in  cement  will  be  to  a  still 
greater  amount  than  mentioned  by  the  Mayor ;  to  wit,  it  will 
be  increased  to  the  same  extent  as  the  dry  or  stone  paving  is 
decreased.  To  explain : 

It  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  section  19  of  the  specifica- 
tions of  the  contract,  that  it  is  provided  that, 

"  The  interior  slopes  of  all  the  banks  will  be  covered  with  8  inches  in  thick- 
ness of  stone  broken  to  pass  through  a  2-inch  ring ;  on  this  will  be  laid  the  pav- 
ing, 18  inches  in  thickness,  of  a  single  course  of  stones  set  on  the  edge  at  right 
angles  with  the  slope,  laid  dry,  and  well  wedged  with  pinners.  Th«  stones  to  be 
laid  in  such  manner  as  may  be  directed  by  the  Engineer,  the  base  of  the  paving  to 
extend  to  the  rock,  or  to  such  depth  as  the  Engineer  may  direct ;  the  stones  to  be- 
sound,  and  of  proper  shape  to  make  neat  and  compact  work." 


18 

The  original  intention  was,  therefore,  to  build  a  dry  or  rip- 
rap wall  on  the  interior  slopes  of  the  embankment.  The  esti- 
mate of  the  quantity  of  paving  required  for  these  slopes  \vas 
47, 111  cubic  yards  (see Estimate).  This  estimate  will  correspond 
almost  exactly  with  the  quantity  which  will  be  actually  put  up 
when  the  contract  is  finished.  The  quantity  of  stone  paving 
has  not  been  increased  or  diminished.  It  is  simply  laid  up  in 
cement  instead  of  being  laid  dry.  The  reasons  and  authority 
therefor  I  will  now  show. 

It  was  found,  as  the  excavation  progressed  and  the  character 
of  the  rock  within  the  lines  of  the  Eeservoir  was  developed, 
that  the  stone  was  unsuitable  for  a  dry  wall.  About  175  cubic 
yards  of  this  wall  was  laid  dry,  and  the  stone  was  found  to  be 
so  unfit  for  a  serviceable  wall,  that  the  Board  directed  the  con- 
tractor to  take  it  down. 

The  question  therefore  arose  whether  the  contractor  should 
be  allowed  to  furnish  suitable  material  from  other  places 
outside  of  our  lines,  or  whether  the  stone  should  be  laid  in 
cement.  The  contract  contained  full  provisions  to  meet  thia 
contingency  also.  See  contract  (section  IT). 

*' Should  the  excavation  within  the  outer  slopes  of  the  exterior  Reservoir 
banks  not  furnish  sufficient  material  of  a  suitable  quality  for  puddling  and  em- 
bankments, in  the  opinion  of  the  Engineer,  then  the  contractor  will  be  required 
to  furnish  enough  material  to  supply  the  deficiency,  and  of  such  quality  as  may 
be  approved  by  the  Engineer." 

By  section  K  of  the  Specifications  it  is  provided,  that  'the  contractor  shall 
receive,  "for  paving  or  constructing  slope  \vall,  the  stone  to  be  takejt  from  the  rock 
excavated,  and  for  labor  in  constructing  the  same,  $1  25  per  cubic  yard." 

By  section  Ka  it  is  provided,  that  for  the  same  stone,  "laid  in  cement  mortar, 
including  all  labor  and  material  to  be  measured  in  the  work,  the  contractor 
shall  receive  $4  00  per  cubic  yard." 

By  section  L,  it  is  provided  that  the  contractors  shall  receive,  "  for  stone  to  be 
furnished  for  the  paving,  in  case  the  stone  should  not  be  deemed  suitable  for  paving 
by  the  Engineer,  in  addition  to  the  price  above  stated  in  item  K,  $3  per  cubic 
yard." 

The  price,  therefore,  for  a  dry  wall  to  be  paid  to  the  con- 
tractors, in  case  they  furnished  the  material  from  outside  of 
the  Reservoir  lines  was  by  the  contract  $4  25  per  cubic  yard ; 
while  the  price  to  be  paid  to  them,  in  case  they  used,  for  the 
wall,  the  stones  found  loithin  the  lines  of  the  reservoir,  laid  in 


19 

hydraulic  mortar,  was  as  above  shown,  only  $4  per  cubic  yard; 
and  assuming  that  the  total  quantity  of  slope  wall  when  finished 
will  correspond  with  the  quantity  estimated,  to*  wit,  47,111 
cubic  }7ards,  we  shall  have  the  whole  laid  up  in  hydraulic  mor- 
tar, for  $11,444  42  less  than  it  would  cost  if  laid  dry  with  any 
stone  available  outside  the  reservoir  ground. 

The  whole  of  this  subject  was  most  carefully  and  thoroughly 
examined  by  myself  personally,  and  at  different  times  by  my- 
self in  conjunction  with  my  colleagues  in  the  Croton  Board. 
The  ground  was  visited,  the  stone  examined,  and  the  question, 
engaging,  as  it  did,  our  earnest  attention,  was  fully  discussed 
in  all  its  bearings. 

Having  become  satisfied  that  it  would  be  utterly  impossible, 
within  any  reasonable  expenditure,  to  construct  a  suitable  dry 
wall  out  of  the  rock  found  within  the  lines  of  the  reservoir, 
and  the  contract  providing  that  the  contractors  should  receive 
less  for  paving  in  cement-mortar  with  the  stone  found  within 
the  lines,  than  for  building  a  dry  wail  out  of  stone  procured  by 
them  elsewhere,  at  a  meeting  of  the  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board,  held  on  the  20th  day  of  May,  1859,  at  which  my  then 
associates,  Messrs.  Myndert  Van  Schaick  and  Theodore  R.  De 
Forest,  were  present,  I  introduced  the  following  preamble  and 
resolution,  which  were  then  unanimously  adopted  : — 

"  Whereas,  It  has  been  found  (by  the  Chief  Engineer)  that 
the  excavation  within  the  lines  of  the  new  Reservoir  does  not  fur- 
nish stone  of  sufficiently  good  quality  to  make  a  suitable  facing 
for  the  interior  slopes,  if  laid  dry,  but  that  the  same  stone  will 
make  a  good  slope  wall  if  laid  in  hydraulic  cement ;  therefore, 

"  Resolved,  That  the  said  slope-wall  be  laid  in  cement  to 
such  extent  as  the  nature  of  the  stone  may  make  it  advisable ; 
such  change,  and  such  character  of  the  work  being  provided  for 
in  the  contract" 

It  is  proper  to  state  in  this  connection,  that  a  wall  of  stone 
laid  in  hydraulic  mortar,  in  the  manner  in  which  this  work  is 
done,  is  better  for  the  purposes  for  which  it  was  designed,  than 
any  dry  wall  which  could  be  constructed  of  any  stone  what- 
ever, of  equal  dimensions. 


The  dry  wall  was  originally  selected  as  a  matter  of  econ- 
omy;  and  if  the  stone  had  proved  good,  a  dry  wall  constructed 
of  it  would  have  been  sufficiently  substantial  in  the  outset, 
though  liable  to  require  earlier  repairs.  When  I  found  that 
the  stone  excavated  would  not  answer  the  purpose,  I  aban- 
doned the  dry  wall,  and  resorted  to  the  substitute  (already  pro- 
vided for  in  the  contract]  which  involved  the  least  expense  to 
the  city. 

In  referring  above  to  my  colleagues,  I  would  not  be  under- 
stood as  wishing  to  divide  the  responsibility  of  this  substitu- 
tion. As  the  professional  adviser  of  our  Board,  I  gave  my 
opinion — and  gave  it  decidedly  ;  and  in  this,  as  well  as  in  all 
points  touching  the  Reservoir,  I  am  not  only  willing,  but  anx- 
ious, to  assume  the  entire  responsibility.  Everything  tbat  has 
been  done,  has  been  solely  for  the  perfection  of  the  work,  and 
nothing  has  been  done  which  was  not  a  clearly-expressed  part  of 
the  contract.  Even  had  we  not  been  so  entirely  fortified  by 
the  forethought  shown,  and  provisions  made  in  the  contract,  I 
would  have  recommended  work  for  which  there  was  no  pro- 
vision, rather  than  that  the  Eeservoir  should  be  imperfect. 
Nay  more — even  could  I  have  imagined  that  any  one  existed  who 
could  impute  to  me  unworthy  motives  for  my  action,  I  would 
have  advised  or  directed  all  that  has  been  done  under  the  contract 
without  reference  to  the  question  whether  or  not  it  would  be 
beneficial  to  the  contractors  ;  and  for  this  simple  reason — that 
I  owed  it  to  the -city  to  do  their  work  honestly  and  well,  with- 
out being  deterred  by  the  risk  of  personal  calumny  or  con- 
temptible suspicion. 

There  has  been  in  fact  therefore  no  decrease  in  the  stone 
paving  /  the  same  amount  of  stone  paving  will  be  laid  as  esti- 
mated—but instead  of  being  laid  dry,  it  is  laid  in  hydraulic 
mortar  for  the  reasons  above  stated. 


INCREASE   OF   CONCRETE. 

The  6th  subdivision  of  the  Mayor's  first  charge  is  :  "  That 
the  concrete  masonry  has  been  increased  by  an  amount  of 
33,568  cubic  yards,  or  more  than  forty  times  the  quantity  ori- 
ginally estimated." 


21 

The  reason  for  this  increase  was  the  charactei  of  the  rock 
hereinbefore  described,  as  developed  in  the  depths  of  the  exca- 
vation for  the  puddle  trenches.  It  was  found  so  full  of  fissures 
and  seams,  even  after  blasting  the  porous  and  disintegrated  por- 
tion away,  that  it  was  deemed  essentially  necessary  to  cover  it 
•with  a  layer  of  concrete,  as  a  bed  or  base  for  the  puddle. 

It  was  supposed  there  would  be  more  or  less  of  these  fis- 
sures and  seams  encountered,  but  it  was  impossible  to  divine 
their  number  or  extent,  and  therefore  impossible  to  make  any 
accurate  estimate  in  respect  to  the  quantity  of  concrete  neces- 
sary to  fill' them. 

Anticipating,  however,  that  concrete  might  probably  be 
required,  the  following  provision  was  inserted  in  the  contract : 

"SECTION  12.  Where  any  fissures,  seams,  or  soft  rock  are  found  within  the 
basin  of  the  Reservoir,  or  tinder  the  banks  thereof,  the  rock  is  to  be  excavated  to 
such  extent  as  the  Engineer  may  direct,  and  the  space  filled  with  concrete,  pud- 
dle, earth,  or  sand,  as  may  be  required  by  the  Engineer." 

As  it  could  not  be  known  whether  it  would  be  necessary  to 
lay  a  bed  of  concrete  for  the  puddle,  and  if  so,  to  what  extent, 
an  estimate  was  made  simply  of  the  concrete  which  would  be 
required  on  the  surface  of  the  middle  or  dividing  embank- 
ment,— 833  cubic  yards,  which  is  just  the  amount  which  will  be 
required  there. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  above,  that  the  variations  from  the 
estimated  relative  quantities  by  way  of  increase  or  diminution 
in  every  item  of  work  alluded  to  in  the  Mayor's  message,  have 
resulted  either  from  the  nature  of  the  ground  as  developed,  or  the 
character  of  the  materials  as  excavated  ;  that  the  estimate  itself 
was  not,  and  was  not  intended  to  be,  an  accurate  statement  of 
quantities,  but  the  best  approximation  to  accuracy  which,  under 
the  circumstances,  could  be  obtained.  As  an  Engineer,  I  do  not 
hesitate  to  declare  that  the  estimate  was  thus  accurate  in  all  its 
parts.  The  only  apparent  change  of  plan  from  the  require- 
ments of  the  contract,  was  the  substitution  of  a  wall  laid  in  hy- 
draulic cement,  for  a  dry  wall  on  the  interior  slope  of  the 
Keservoir.  I  have  shown  that  this  "  change"  was  foreseen  and 
provided  for,  and  was  induced  by  the  nature  of  the  rock  encoun- 
tered, and  by  the  desire  on  my  part  to  avoid  the  necessity  of 


procuring  materials  for  a  dry  wall  from  outside  the  Reservoir 
lines,  at  a  greater  cost  I  have  also  shown  that  this  "change" 
(if  that  can  be  called  a  change  which  is  provided  for  in  the 
contract)  was  concurred  in  by  the  Croton  Board  unanimously. 

It  may,  however,  be  inquired  what  authority  had  the  Cro- 
ton Board  to  authorize  this  substitution.  The  answer  will  be 
found  in  the  following  extract  from  the  contract  itself,  which 
not  only  authorizes  all  that  we  have  done,  but  would  have  au- 
thorized an  actual  change  of  plan,  had  the  developments  of 
the  work  made  a  change  necessary  for  its  perfection. 

"And  said  parties  of  the  second  part  further  agree,  that  said  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board,  or  the  engineer,  may  make  alterations  in  plan,  form,  or  dimension  of  said 
work,  either  before  or  after  the  commencement  of  the  construction.  If  such 
alterations  diminish  the  quantity  of  work  to  be  done,  they  shall  not  constitute  a 
claim  for  damages,  or  for  anticipated  profits  on  the  work  that  may  be  so  dis- 
pensed with.  If  they  increase  the  amount  of  work,  such  increase  shall  be  paid 
for  only  according  to  the  quantity  actually  done,  and  at  the  price  established  for 
similar  work  under  this  contract ;  and  the  contract  will  be  regarded  as  com- 
pletely executed  and  fulfilled,  when  the  work  required  by  the  altered  plans  is 
done  and  paid  for,  as  herein  provided. 

And  it  is  further  agreed,  that  if  the  work  shall  be  increased  by  the  enlarge- 
ment of  any  part  of  the  same,  or  by  any  contingent  work  which  the  engineer 
may  deem  necessary  to  facilitate  the  execution,  or  render  the  work  in  any  par- 
ticular conformable  to  local  circumstances,  or  which  may  be  deemed  by  the 
engineer  necessary  for  perfecting  the  work,  beyond  what  is  provided  for  in  this 
contract  and  specifications,  such  increase  shall  be  paid  for  at  the  same  rate  as 
similar  work  is  herein  contracted  to  be  paid  for;  and  if  such  work  is  not  similar 
to  work  herein  contracted  for,  it  shall  be  paid  for  as  an  extra  item,  at  a  price  to 
be  agreed  upon  previously  to  the  commencement  of  such  extra  work." 

It  was  under  this  authority  that  the  Board  acted  in  making 
this  "  change ;"  an  authority  which  was  reserved  to  them  by 
the  contract  for  the  express  purpose  of  meeting  such  an  exi- 
gency. 

CHANGES   BENEFICIAL   TO    CONTRACTORS. 

But  it  is  alleged  against  me,  that  "  whenever  these  changes 
have  been  made,  they  have  proved  very  beneficial  to  the  con- 
tractors, and,  in  most  instances,  have   largely  increased  the 
amount  which  the  city  must  pay  for  the  work." 

What  is  the  proof?  The  Mayor  admits  his  ignorance  of  the 
subject.  He  says :  "  It  requires  either  the  professional  knowl- 
edge of  an  engineer,  or  the  experience  of  a  contractor  acquainted 


with  such  work,  to  determine  the  actual  value  of  the  different- 
kinds  of  work  required  for  the  Reservoir."  And  he  adds  :  "  Not 
having  this  knowledge,  I  have  availed  myself  of  the  opinions  of 
the  most  skillful  contractors."  And  where  are  their  opinions  ? 
He  finds  them  in  the  bids  of  Gumming  &  Co./br  those  particu- 
lar items  of  the  work  which  happen  to  le  lower  than  the  bids  on 
the  same  items  by  Fairchild  &  Co.  The  total  bid  of  Cummings 
&  Co.,  was  the  next  above  to  that  of  Fairchild  &  Co.  What 
authorizes  him  to  say  that  the  bids  of  Fairchild  &  Co.,  being 
in  some  instances  higher  than  those  of  Gumming  &  Co.,  shew 
them  to  be  remunerative  ?  I  have  shewn  to  you  that  by  uni- 
versal experience,  the  bids  for  special  items  of  a  work  are  no 
evidence  that  such  bids  are  remunerative;  on  'the  contrary, 
that  bids  on  certain  items  are  frequently  made  at  a  known 
loss.  IF/fy  select  the  lids  of  Gumming  &  Co.,  and  ignore 
the  bids  of  the  sixteen  other  contractors  ? 

Take  the  items  quoted  by  the  Mayor : 

Excavation  has  been  increased  beyond  the  estimate.  Fair- 
child  &  Co.  receive  21  cents.  The  bids  for  this  item  varied 
from  12  to  60  cents,  one  being  at  12  cents,  two  at  20  cents,, 
and  Gumming  &  Co.  being  22.  Who  can  tell,  testing  the 
matter  by  such  bids,  whether  21  cents  is  remunerative  or  not  ?" 
or,  to  use  the  language  of  the  Mayor,  "  very  beneficial  to  the 
contractors."  By  the  test  which  he  has  adopted,  of  selecting 
the  lid  of  Gumming  &  Co.  as  a  criterion,  Fairchild  &  Co. 
must  be  making  the  excavation  at  a  loss. 

Stone-paving  has  been  decreasedbelow  the  estimate.  Fairchild 
&  Co.  receive  125  cents.  The  bids  on  this  item  varied  from  90 
to  750  cents,  the  bid  of  Gumming  &  Co.  being  135.  Who  can 
say  that  it  was  "  beneficial  to  the  contractor  "  to  have  this  item 
decreased  when  other  bidders  were  ready  to  do  it  at  90  cents  £ 

Paving  in  cement  has  been  increased  above  the  estimate. 
Fairchild  &  Co.  receive  400  cents.  The  bids  on  this  item 
varied  from  250  to  850  cents  ;  that  of  Gumming  &  Co.  being 
350  cents.  Who  can  say  that  the  increase  of  this  item  was 
"  beneficial  "  to  the  contractors  at  400  cents,  when  other  bid- 
ders were  not  willing  to  do  it  for  double  the  amount  of  the 
compensation  which  they  are  to  receive? 


The  concrete  masonry  has  also  been  increased.  Fairchild 
&  Co.  receiving  500  cents,  the  other  bidders  varying  from  298 
to  800  cents.  Four  only  out  of  the  seventeen  bidders  were 
willing  to  do  it  for  less  than  500  cents.  Eleven  bidders  asked 
from  500  to  800  cents.  Which  was  the  remunerative  price  ? 
Who  can  say  that  it  was  "  beneficial  "  to  Fairchild  &  Co  to  do 
this  item  at  their  price  ? 

But  why  in  this  minute  catalogue  did  the  Mayor  omit 
another  item,  to  wit,  puddle,  which,  he  says  in  another  place, 
has  been  increased  beyond  the  estimate  more  than  37  per 
cent  ?  The  bids  on  this  item  varied  from  20  to  150  cents. 
Fairchild  &  Co.  bidding  the  lowest  price  of  all,  viz.,  20 
cents ;  Gumming  &  Co.  bidding  30  cents.  Was  this  increase 
beneficial  to  Fairchild  &  Co.  ?  By  the  test  adopted  by  the 
Mayor  it  was  very  prejudicial  to  them.  Why  then  did  he  not 
mention  it  ? 

The  allegation  of  the  Ma3*or,  therefore,  that  "  whenever 
these  changes  have  been  made,  they  have  proved  very  bene- 
ficial to  the  contractors  "  (admitted  by  him  to  be  made  in  total 
ignorance),  is  wholly  contradicted  by  the  only  test  by  which  he 
seeks  to  establish  the  charge. 

Independent  of  this  fallacious  test,  however,  I  am  entirely 
satisfied  from  my  own  observation  and  experience,  that  the 
prices  paid  Fairchild  &  Co.  for  the  excavation  and  the  puddle, 
the  .quantities  of  which  have  from  necessity  been  largely  in- 
creased, are  not  remunerative ;  that  the  other  items  of  increase, 
to  wit,  the  paving  in  cement,  and  the  concrete  masonry, 
considering  the  strict  manner  in  which  the  contractors  are 
held  to  the  letter  of  their  contract,  are  paid  for  at  prices  which 
are  only  fair  and  by  no  means  extravagant. 

In  fact,  in  the  original  calculations  of  the  cost  of  the  entire 
work,  made  for  the  use  and  guidance  of  the  Board  before 
even  the  proposals  were  drawn,  I  set  down  the  probable 
price  for  excavation  and  puddle  at  a  higher  figure  than  those 
payable  under  the  contract ;  and  the  probable  prices  for  slope 
wall,  if  laid  up  in  mortar,  and  for  concrete,  at  about  the  same 
figure  as  is  now  payable  under  the  contract. 

At  this  point  may  very  properly  be  introduced  a  statement 
of  what  really  was  the  original  estimate  of  the  cost  of  this 


25 

Reservoir,  in  which  the  Mayor  alleges  so  gross  a  mistake  was 
made  by  the  Engineer.  The  Mayor's  charge  is  so  worded  as 
to  lead  you  to  the  belief  that  my  original  estimate  of  the  cost, 
exclusive  of  the  gate-houses,  was  some  $630,000,  and  that  its 
actual  cost  will  be  $100,000  more  than  that  sum.  This,  as  he 
well  knows,  was  simply  the  bid  or  estimate  of  Fairchild  & 
Co.,  made  in  competing  for  the  work.  NoV,  I  am  prepared 
to  show  you,  that  my  original  estimate  of  the  probable  cost  of 
the  whole  work,  exclusive  of  the  gate  houses,  made  for  the 
guidance  of  the  City  Government,  was  in  round  numbers 
$1,025,000,  instead  of  $632,473  24,  which  was  simply  the 
bid  of  Fairchild  &  Co.  If  you  will  add  what  the  Mayor 
is  pleased  to  term  my  "  mistakes  "  to  this  sum  of  $632,473  24, 
you  will  still  find  that  the  total  cost  of  the  work  will  be  at 
least  $100,000  less  than  my  estimate,  instead  of  being  over 
$100,000  more.*  The  reasons  that  my  estimate  will  now  be 
found  to  be  ample,  are,  1st,  That  my  prices  on  the  several 
items,  making  up  the  total,  were  higher  than  those  bid  by  a 
majority  of  the  competitors ;  and,  2d,  because  to  this  total, 
my  experience  as  an  Engineer  cautioned  me  to  add  sufficient 
to  meet  all  the  contingencies  which  have  been  already  actu- 
ally developed  in  the  progress  of  the  work,  and  which  I  have 
so  minutely  described. 

*  As  it  may  be  inferred  from  the  Mayor's  statement  that  the  cost  of  the  new 
Reservoir  will  be  excessive,  it  is  well  to  make  here  a  comparison  which  will  be 
understood  at  a  glance  : 

The  present  Distributing  Reservoir  cost $434,551 

The  present  Receiving  "  "    414,500 

The  new  Reservoir  now  under  construction,  will  cost,  including  Gate- 
houses, and  making  full  allowance  for  developments 1,000,000 

The  capacity  of  the  new  Reservoir  is  5.625  (or  more  than  5i) 
times  greater  than  that  of  the  present  Reservoir,  and  40.18 
(or  more  that  40)  times  greater  than  that  of  the  Distribut- 
ing Reservoir.  In  other  words,  the  cost,  per  gallon  of  ca- 
pacity is  as  follows : 

Distributing  Reservoir 2.316  cent?. 

Present  Receiving  Reservoir 276  of  a  cent. 

New  Reservoir 119 

No  arguments  as  to  the  relative  economy  of  building  large  or  small  Reser- 
voirs, will  weaken  the  fact  here  shown  ;  that,  by  comparison,  the  new  Reservoir 
will  be  finished  at  an  exceedingly  reasonable  price,  to  say  the  least. 


From  the  facts  here  stated  in  regard  to  the  extent  of  area, 
and  the  peculiar  character  of  the  ground,  no  one  will  have 
been  surprised  to  learn  that  the  actual  quantities  have  differed 
from  the  approximate  estimate,  while  many  will  be  surprised 
only  because  they  differ  so  little.  The  only  point,  then,  rests 
in  the  allegation  pf  the  Mayor,  that  these  differences  or  vari- 
ations have,  in  every  case,  proved  beneficial  to  the  contractors. 
I  have  said  enough,  I  trust,  to  show  that  this  charge,  like  its 
predecessors,  is  wholly  unfounded. 


MISTAKE   IN    AWARDING   THE    CONTRACT. 

But,  it  is  said  that  I  made  a  mistake  in  awarding  the  con- 
tract to  Fairchild  &  Co.,  as  lower  bidders  than  Gumming  & 
Co. 

This  is  not  true.  In  the  first  place,  the  award  was  not 
made  by  me  personally,  but  by  the  entire  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board.  In  the  next  place,  there  can  be  no  "mistake  "  in  an 
estimate  of  this  kind,  where  there  is  not  only  no  assertion  or 
even  pretence  of  perfect  exactness,  but  an  actual  provision  for, 
and  warning  against  contingent  developments.  In  the  third 
place,  the  award  was  perforce  made  in  obedience  to  the  char- 
ter, which  requires  work  to  be  let  to  the  lowest  bidder. 

The  Mayor  does  not  pretend  to  deny  that  the  bid  of  Fair- 
child  &  Co.  was  lower  than  that  of  Gumming  &  Co.,  by 
$97,33i  32,  nor  that  the  bids  were  tested  by  the  estimate  made 
for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  who  was  the  lowest  bidder, 
while  it  has  been  already  fully  shown  no  closer  approximation  to 
the  developed  facts  than  that  estimate  could  have  been  made, 
without  incurring  an  expense  unwarranted  by  the  circum- 
stances. 

RUMORS. 

Having  fully  refuted  all  that  is  either  openly  uttered  or 
covertly  insinuated  in  the  expressed  charges  of  the  Mayor  as  to 
the  new  Reservoir,  I  beg  to  call  your  attention,  for  a  moment, 
to  the  extraordinary  language  with  which  he  concludes  this 
portion  of  his  message. 


27 

He  says,  "In  commenting  upon  this  subject,  I  have  ab- 
stained from  giving  currency  to  any  of  the  rumors  which  have 
reached  me."  "With  what  object,  let  me  ask,  was  this  allega- 
tion made  ?  Were  the  rumors  which  float  in  the  air  of  the 
Mayor's  office  true,  or  were  they  false  ?  He  does  not  conde- 
scend to  inform  you.  What  was  their  substance  ?  He  does 
not  state.  From  whom  did  they  proceed  ?  and  who  were  en- 
gaged in  their  promulgation  ?  He  is  silent.  Did  they  come 
from  the  vicious  and  corrupt,  whose  efforts  at  extortion  I 
had  baffled  and  defeated  ?  or  from  some  schemer  for  my 
office  ?  or  from  the  parasites  of  power,  who  hoped  for  favor, 
by  offering  up  the  incense  of  my  slaughtered  reputation  ?  He 
does  not  inform  you.  He  merely  states  that  he  has  "  abstained 
from  giving  currency  to  any  of  the  rumors."  If  he  professed 
to  be  too  honorable  to  give  them  currency,  why  did  he  not  ab- 
stain from  stating  the  fact,  if  such  a  fact  there  be,  of  their 
existence  ?  Was  it  intended  to  set  the  imagination  of  men  at 
work,  and  to  allow  them  to  give  these  rumors  their  form  and 
feature,  each  according  to  his  own  fertility  and  caprice  ?  I 
have  now  been  engaged  more  than  twenty-five  years  in  the 
arduous  duties  of  my  profession.  For  eleven  years  past  I  have 
been  known  to  my  fellow-citizens  in  the  responsible  position  I 
now  hold.  Both  here  and  in  other  places,  I  have  successfully 
prosecuted  important  public  works,  costing  millions  of  dollars, 
and  until  I  read  this  message  of  the  Mayor,  1  never  heard  of 
any  remarks  prejudicial  in  the  slightest  degree  to  my  reputa- 
tion. For  my  own  part,  I  do  not  believe  that  the  Mayor  has 
ever  heard  a  whisper  to  that  effect  from  lips  that  were  honest ; 
and  I  ask  you,  and  all  men,  who,  having  character,  know  its 
value,  what  expression  in  the  English  language  is  applicable 
to  one  who,  in  hunting  a  man  down  for  his  office,  attempts 
in  this  manner  to  "  rumor  "  away  his  reputation  ? 

PAVING   OF   49  TH    STREET. 

I  ask  your  attention  now  to  the  second  charge  of  the 
Mayor,  viz.  : — 

That  in  the  work  of  paving  49th  street  from  3d  to  Lexing- 
ton Avenue,  with  trap  blocks,  the  Engineer  did  not  exercise 
proper  vigilance  ;  that  the  materials  employed  were  not  in  ac- 


28 

cordance  with  the  contract,  but  that  an  inferior  quality  of  stone 
was  used,  and  also  that  the  work  was  performed  in  so  negligent 
a  manner  as  to  cause  it  to  settle  in  many  cases  immediately 
after  its  completion  ;  that  the  Croton  Board  had  notice  of  the 
defective  character  of  the  material  employed  in  the  work,  but 
notwithstanding,  gave  a  certificate  of  its  completion  and  ac- 
ceptance. 

What  is  the  proof  to  sustain  this  accusation  '.  Nothing 
more  than  the  unsworn  statement  of  nine  persons  claiming  to 
be  owners  of  property  on  the  line  of  the  street,  and  interested 
in  defeating  the  assessment  for  the  work. 

Did  the  Mayor  investigate  this  charge  ?  Does  he  believe 
it  to  be  true  ?  On  the  contrary,  in  the  same  breath  in  which 
he  makes  the  charge,  he  expresses  entire  ignorance  of  it ;  be- 
cause he  says,  "  either  the  property  owners  are  utterly  mistaken 
in  their  emphatic  condemnation  of  the  work,  or  Mr.  Craven 
has  been  guilty  of  gross  negligence  in  its  supervision  and  ex- 
amination." I  will  now  proceed  to  show  the  facts  of  the  case. 

I  find,  upon  inquiry  of  the  Water  Purveyor,  who  is  charged 
by  law  with  the  superintendence  of  paving,  that  the  work  was 
commenced  on  the  fifth  day  of  October,  1859  (but  six  days  pre- 
ceding the  date  of  the  alleged  notice) ;  that  immediately  after 
the  notice,  he  inspected  the  stone  brought  upon  the  ground  by 
the  contractor ;  that  he  culled  out  and  rejected  all  the  stone 
which  was  not  in  accordance  with  the  contract,  and 
that  such  stone  was  then  removed  from  the  ground ; 
that  he  visited  the  work  daily  for  the  purpose  of  seeing 
that  it  was  properly  done  and  in  accordance  with  the 
contract ;  and  that  after  the  25th  of  October,  Mr.  Eldridge, 
who  was  then  appointed  General  Inspector  of  Paving  Con- 
tracts, visited  the  street  twice  a  day  for  the  same  purpose. 
Each  of  these  officers  reports  further,  that,  whenever  he  found 
any  stone  not  in  accordance  with  the  contract,  he  threw  it  out 
and  ordered  the  Inspector  on  the  work  to  do  the  same.  This 
was  done  to  such  an  extent  that  the  contractor  and  his  friends 
complained  to  the  Water  Purveyor  against  what  they  termed 
his  persecution. 

The  contractor  was  Mr.  W.  A.  Gumming,  one  of  the  most 
respectable  and  reliable  contractors  in  the  city. 


On  the  10th  day  of  November,  1859,  the  Inspector  in  charge 
of  the  work  made  return  under  oath  to  the  Board,  that  it  had 
been  completed  in  conformity  to  the  specifications  of  the  con- 
tract. The  Water  Purveyor  subsequently  certified  his  approval 
of  the  same,  and  it  was  thereupon  sent* to  the  Bureau  of  Asses- 
sors for  their  action  thereon. 

The  remonstrants,  if  injury  had  been  done  to  them  by  the 
Croton  Board,  had  then  an  opportunity  of  appearing  before 
the  Assessors,  a  body  entirely  distinct  and  free  from  the  con- 
trol of  the  Croton  Board.  It  appears  by  the  papers  on  file  that 
they  did  so, — that  they  were  heard  before  the  Assessors,  and 
that  the  Board  of  Assessors  decided  that  they  had  failed  to  make 
a  case  which  would  warrant  them  in  refusing  to  make  an  assess- 
ment. It  also  appears  by  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  As- 
sessments of  your  own  Board,  that  they  did  not  consider  the 
remonstrances,  attached  to  the  assessment  list  by  the  Assessors, 
as  required  b}T  law,  sufficient  to  delay  the  confirmation  of  the 
assessment.  The  Board  of  Councilmen  concurred  with  your 
Board  in  confirming  the  assessment.  It  was  reserved  for  the 
Mayor  to  discover  that  the  "Water  Purveyor,  two  Inspectors 
on  the  work,  three  members  of  the  Croton  Board,  three  Asses- 
sors, the  Committees  on  Assessments  of  both  Boards,  and  a  ma- 
jority of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  and  Councilmen,  were  all 
wrong  in  regard  to  this  matter,  and  that  the  owners  of  property, 
assessed  for  the  improvement,  were  right.  One  word  as  to  the 
signatures  attached  to  the  remonstrance  before  the  assessors. 
The  name  of  J.  M.  Henry  appears  among  the  signatures.  Mr. 
Henry,  I  am  informed,  is  employed  in  the  office  of  the  Asses- 
sors, and  was  requested  by  Mr.  Saxton,  whose  name  heads  the 
signatures  to  one  of  the  remonstrances,  to  erase  his  name.  Mr. 
Henry  accordingly  drew  his  pen  through  the  name  of  Mr. 
Saxton,  and  to  show  that  it  had  been  stricken  out  by  authority, 
wrote  his  own  name  opposite  to  the  erasure.  And  -yet  Mr. 
Saxton  and  Mr.  Henry  are  returned  to  you  by  the  Mayor  as 
two  of  the  eleven  owners  of  property  who  remonstrated  against 
the  assessment.* 

*  It  is  a  little  curious  that  the  most  prominent  citizen  on  the  list  of  remon- 
strants, has  assured  me,  since  the  attempt  of  the  Mayor  to  remove  me,  that  he 
took  much  trouble  to  obtain  an  opportunity  of  signing  one  the  numerous  remon- 
strances against  the  proposed  action  of  the  Mayor. 


30 

SEWER   IN   40TH   ST.,  9TH  AVE.,  39TH  ST.,  ETC. 

1  have  now  to  call  your  attention  to  the  third  charge  of  the 
Mayor.  He  says — 

"  That  an  error  of  eight  inches  in  the  maximum  depth  was 
made  in  the  grade  of  a  "Sewer  now  in  progress  in  40th  street, 
9th  avenue,  39th  street,  and  8th  avenue,  which  error  may  in- 
volve the  city  in  litigation  and  loss,  and  which  throws  a  serious 
responsibility  on  the  Engineer  of  the  Board,  showing  the  want 
of  the  constant  care  and  entire  accuracy  demanded  of  one  to 
whose  professional  skill  is  entrusted  the  construction  of  import- 
ant public  works." 

The  Croton  Board,  intending  to  make  a  contract  for  this 
work,  directed  one  of  the  City  Surveyors  to  prepare  a  plan  and 
profile  of  the  sewer,  by  which  the  specifications  for  the  work 
could  be  drawn  and  the  contract  let.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  City  Surveyors  are  appointed  by  the  Common  Council, 
and  although  the  Croton  Board  has  no  voice  in  their  recommen- 
dation or  control  over  their  appointment,  they  yet  are  obliged 
to  employ  them  on  all  work  which  is  to  be  paid  for  by  assess- 
ment. The  City  Surveyor  selected  for  this  work  was  in  good 
standing,  and  had  been  employed  on  similar  work  in  common 
with  the  other  City  Surveyors  for  many  years,  to  the  entire  sat- 
isfaction of  the  Board.  He  made  the  plan  and  profile,  but  it 
appears  after  the  contract  had  been  let  and  the  work  was  pro- 
gressing, that  he  had  erred  in  his  minutes  of  the  depth  of  ex- 
cavation for  the  sewer  trench.  By  this  error,  neither  the  origi- 
nal plan,  nor  line,  nor  the  efficiency  of  the  sewer  itself  was  in 
any  degree  altered  or  impaired.  The  simple  effect  was,  that  at 
the  corner  of  9th  avenue  and  39th  street,  the  contractor,  in 
order  to  get  down  to  the  proper  grade,  was  obliged  to  excavate 
eight  inches  deeper  than  was  indicated  by  the  levels  given  on 
the  original  profile  on  which  the  contractors  had  based  their 
proposals.  This  additional  eight  inches  of  excavation  became 
extra  wo?'k,  for  which  the  contractor  is  undoubtedly  entitled  to 
compensation.  As  soon  as  the  error  was  discovered  and  re- 
ported to  me,  I  conferred  with  the  Corporation  Counsel,  and 
our  Board  have,  in  his  opinion,  and  by  his  advice,  done  all  that 
is  necessary  for  the  protection  both  of  the  contractor  and  the 
public. 


31 

Although  I  will  not  Callow  any  one  to  throw  upon  me  the 
mistakes  in  levels,  however  rare,  of  any  of  the  thirty  or  more 
Surveyors,  who  are  appointed  by  the  Common  Council,  and 
whom  .we  are  obliged  by  ordinance  to  employ,  justice  to  the  Sur- 
veyor in  question  has  led  me  to  make  a  fuller  explanation  on 
this  charge  than  for  myself  I  would  have  made. 


Rb/TENTION     OF     CORN  WELL    AND   COHBOY    IN     THE     EMPLOYMENT 
OF    THE   DEPARTMENT. 

The  fourth  charge  of  the  Mayor  is  as  follows : — 

That  John  Cornwell  and  Willianr  Conboy,  employes  of  the 
department,  who  had  a  private  job  for  the  excavation  of  a  cel- 
lar at  Yorkville,  were  accused  before  the  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board  in  December,  1859,  by  John  Chappel,  and  three  others, 
to  the  effect  that  Cornwell  had  furnished  powder,  fuse,  and 
tools  belonging  to  the  Department  to  aid  in  the  performance  of 
this  private  contract,  and  had  allowed  men  in  the  employ  of 
the  Department  and  under  his  supervision  to  work  upon  this 
cellar,  and  had  fraudulently  returned  to  the  Department  the 
time  they  were  thus  engaged  in  this  private  contract — thus 
causing  the  men  to  be  paid  by  the  Department  for  labor  per- 
formed on  private  work;  that  notwithstanding  the  admission 
of  Conboy  himself  that  he  borrowed  powder,  fuse,  and  tools 
from  Cornwell,  both  of  these  persons  are  yet  retained  in  the 
service  of  the  Department ;  that  Mr.  Tappen,  the  then  acting 
President,  and  myself,  the  Chief  Engineer,  ought  to  have  had 
them  indicted  for  converting  the  public  property  to  their  own 
use,  and  had  them  excluded  by  their  conviction  from  ever  re- 
ceiving or  holding  any  office  under  the  city  charter  ;  that  we 
have  upheld  them  in  robbing  the  city  of  public  property — re- 
fused to  invoke  the  most  decided  vindication  of  the  law  against 
them,  and,  by  keeping  them  in  service,  have  subverted  the  good 
faith  and  honesty  of  the  Department. 

These  are  very  serious  charges,  alleging  very  enormous 
offences,  and  conveyed  in  very  strong  language,  suited,  if  true, 
to  their  enormity. 

What  are  the  facts  ?  Conboy  had  been  a  laborer  in  a  gang 
of  which  Cornwell  was  foreman,  and  got  a  job,  when  he  was  not 
in  our  employment,  for  excavating  a  small  private  cellar  at  York- 
ville. His  fellow-laborers,  in  the  same  gang,  helped  him  in 
the  work  at  such  intervals  as  they  were  not  required  by  our 


32 

Department,  which  they  had  a  right  to  do.  John  Chappel  and 
three  others  were  laborers  whom  we  had  discharged,  and  who, 
for  some  reason  or  other  unknown  to  me,  bore  very  ill-will 
against  Cornwell,  whom  we  had  retained.  They  brought  before 
the  Board  several  accusations  against  him,  to  wit : — 

1st.  That  Cornwell  was  interested  in  the  job  with  Conboy. 

2d.  That  Cornwell  used  the  powder,  fuse,  and  tools  of  the 
Department  in  its  execution. 

3d.  That  he  returned  the  time  of  the  fellow-laborers  on  the 
job  as  time  expended  in  the  service  of  the  Department,  and  re- 
ceived pay  accordingly ;  and 

4th.  That  they  thereby  excavated  this  cellar  at  the  cost  and 
expense  of  the  city. 

These  charges  were  carefully,  patiently,  and  thoroughly  in- 
vestigated by  our  full  Board,  Hon.  Myndert  Yan  Schaick*  in 
the  chair.  The  examination  took  three  or  four  days,  about  four 
hours  each  day.  The  testimony  was  contradictory,  and  failed  ut- 
terly to  prove  the  slightest  fraud,  or  attempt  at  fraud,  on  the  part 
of  either  Conboy  or  Cornwell.  Judging  from  the  testimony  and 
the  manner  of  the  witnesses  in  giving  it,  the  members  of  the 
Board  were  immediate  and  unanimous  in  their  conviction  that 
no  possible  suspicion  of  dishonesty  could  attach  to  the  accused. 
This  opinion,  drawn  from  the  evidence  as  heard  and  listened 
to,  was  moreover  fully  in  accordance  with  the  character  of 
Cornwell,  who  through  a  steady  service  in  the  Department 
since  its  creation  in  18i9,  had  proved  himself  at  all  times,  and 
under  all  trials,  unquestionably  entitled  to  our  unreserved  con- 
fidence. 

Two  facts,  however,  were  proved,  which  we  deemed  of  some 
importance — 

1st.  That  Cornwell  did  lend  to  Conboy,  at  some  unexpected 
emergency  arising  in  the  excavation,  one  keg  of  powder  (worth 
about  $2  75) ;  150  feet  of  fuse  (worth  about  $1  75) ;  and  5  or  6 

*  The  Mayor  must  know  that  Mr.  Tappen,  the  Aest  Commissioner,  was  not  then 
acting  President,  as  he  alleges.  The  examination  was  in  the  early  part  of  De- 
cember, 1869,  and  Mr.  Van  Schaick  did  not  tender  his  resignation  until  after 
Mayor  Wood's  assumption  of  office. 


picks,  the  property  of  the  city.  It  was  proved,  however,  beyond 
all  doubt,  that  these  articles  were  returned,  and  that  not  a  penny 
of  loss  was  sustained  by  the  city,  and  that  nothing  was  further 
from  the  intention  of  these  men  than  to  convert  the  public 
property  to  their  own  use.  The  powder  agent  who  supplies 
contractors  from  the  magazine,  only  makes  his  rounds  about 
once  a  week,  and  it  is  customary  for  contractors  and  gangs  of 
workmen,  who  happen  to  be  without  powder,  when  they  encoun- 
ter a  wet  piece  of  rock  which  requires  immediate  attention,  to 
borrow  powder  and  fuse  from  each  other. 

2d.  It  was  also  proved  that  Cornwell  had  returned,  on  the 
pay  roll  of  the  Department,  three  or  four  days  more  time  for 
one  of  the  men  than  the  man  had  made  In  the  service  of  the 
city.  In  excuse  for  this  mistake,  it  appeared  that  he  was 
at  that  time  «in  charge  of  two  gangs  of  men,  working  in 
different  streets,  and  at  considerable  distance  from  each  other 
— that  this  was  done  to  save  the  Department  the  expense 
of  an  additional  foreman — that  in  taking  the  time  of  the 
men  on  these  two  gangs  he  trusted,  on  the  occasion  above  re- 
ferred to,  partially  to  a  hasty  look  at  the  gangs,  and  partially 
to  the  report  of  the  laborer  who  acted  as  sub-foreman  during 
his  absence.  This  was  deemed  gross  negligence,  and  for  this, 
as  well  as  for  lending  the  powder,  fuse  and  tools,  he  was  severely 
reprimanded ;  but,  both  because  of  his  long  tried  fidelity,  and 
the  entire  disproof  of  the  main  and  very  serious  charges  under 
which  he  was  tried,  it  was  deemed  neither  expedient  nor  justi- 
fiable to  dismiss,  or  even  suspend  him  from  the  works. 

On  the  25th  day  of  February  last,  the  Mayor  sent  a  note 
asking  for  the  papers  and  testimony  in  the  case.  They  were 
promptly  and  cheerfully  given.  If  looked  at  in  the  light  in 
which  the  Mayor  has  viewed  our  action,  is  it  not  strange  that 
we  should  have  preserved  so  carefully  such  a  record  of  it,  and 
have  been  so  willing  at  all  times  to  submit  it  to  the  public  for 
examination  and  criticism  ?  After  reading  them,  he  expressed 
surprise  that  Cornwell  should  be  retained  in  the  Department. 
Mr.  Tappen  and  I  immediately  went  to  him  and  told  him  all 
the  circumstances,  and  how  different  was  the  impression  of  the 
Board  while  listening  to  the  evidence  and  lojking  at  the  per- 


34 

sons  giving  it,  from  what  it  might  be  on  merely  reading  the 
written  testimony  ;  but  that  if  he  still  thought,  in  view  of  the 
written  testimony,  that  it  was  injudicious  to  keep  Corn  well, 
rather  than  that  the  good  name  of  the  Department  should 
suffer,  we  would  remove  him.  The  Mayor  replied,  that  under 
the  circumstances,  he  wished  us  to  let  Cornwell  stay  for  the 
present. 

The  substance  of  this  conversation  I  repeated  frankly  to 
Cornwell,  and  advised  him  to  see  the  Mayor  for  his  more  per- 
fect satisfaction  in  the  matter ;  which  he  said  he  would  do,  and 
if  he  could  not  satisfy  him  he  would  resign  cheerfully  rather 
than  give  us  any  annoyance.  He  called  on  the  Mayor  in  com- 
pany Avith  Councilman  Baulch,  when,  as  I  understood  from 
both  Cornwell  and  Baulch,  the  Mayor  said  he  (Cornwell)  had 
better  stay  where  he  was.  Since  that  time  the  Mayor  has  regu- 
larly, every  fortnight,  approved  and  countersigned  the  warrants 
necessary  for  the  payment  of  Cornwell  and  Conboy. 

Against  the  laborer,  Conboy,  nothing  whatever  was  proven, 
and  of  course  nothing  whatever  was  done. 

A  simple  comparison  of  the  charge  of  the  Mayor  in  this 
matter,  with  the  facts  above  stated,  will  make  further  comment 
on  this  point  unnecessary. 

SERIOUS    DISAGREEMENTS   AND   INSUBORDINATION. 

Having  examined  the  four  different  accusations,  with  their 
several  subdivisions,  contained  in  the  second  message  of  the 
Mayor,  1  have  now  to  ask  your  attention  to  his  first  message, 
in  which  he  urges  my  removal  upon  the  ground  of  "  serious 
disagreements  and  inwbwdination" 

I  am  at  a  loss  to  understand  how  there  can  be  any  disa- 
greements, between  me  or  the  Croton  Board  and  the  Mayor,  in 
the  discharge  of  our  duties,  because,  by  the  laws  and  the  dis- 
tribution of  powers  confided  to  each,  there  is  no  subject  upon 
which  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  agree.  The  action  and  de- 
cision of  the  Board  on  the  matters  within  their  jurisdiction  are 
final  and  conclusive;  there  cannot,  therefore,  be  any  "  disa 
greement "  between  us  ;  there  may  be  dissatisfaction. 

Nor  can  I  understand  how  I  can  be  guilty  of  "insubordi- 
nation "  to  him.  I  am  not  "  subordinate  "  to  him  in  any  sense 


35 

whatever.  I  am  an  engineer.  He  is  a  layman.  I  am  an  offi- 
cer, employed  professionally  on  the  plans  and  execution  of 
public  works  requiring  skill  and  science.  He  is  the  Mayor  of 
the  city,  and  modestly,  but  justly,  acknowledges  his  total  igno- 
rance of  both.  The  law  has  committed,  therefore,  no  such 
folly  as  making  me,  in  my  official  capacity,  "  subordinate  "  to 
him  ;  and  the  act  of  1849,  organizing  the  Croton  Board,  and 
defining  the  duties  of  the  Chief  Engineer,  places  this  fact  be- 
yond a  doubt. 

The  language  and  spirit  of  that  act,  an  appointment  for 
five  years,  and  numerous  other  items,  show  the  clear  intention 
of  the  Legislature,  that  this  most  important  branch  of  the  pub- 
lic service  should  be  saved,  as  far  as  possible,  from  the  baneful 
effects  of  the  changes  of  party,  and  the  demands  of  patronage. 
The  Mayor  is  authorized  and  required  to  see  that  the  laws  and 
ordinances,  as  adopted,  are  honestly  and  faithfully  executed  by 
us.  And  in  case  of  fraud,  or  neglect  on  our  part,  he  has  the 
power  to  ask  for  onr  removal,  by  and  with  the  concurrence  of 
the  Board  of  Aldermen,  for  causes  to  be  stated.  But  he  has  no 
power  to  suspend  the  operation  of  a  law,  or  of  an  ordinance 
once  enacted,  nor  to  interfere  in  the  plans  of  public  works  un- 
der our  charge,  nor  with  the  appointments  or  pay  of  the  agents 
whom  we  shall  select  for  their  execution. 

He  has  the  power,  however,  and  is  required  to  countersign 
all  warrants  drawn  by  the  Comptroller  for  the  payment  01 
money  from  the  public  treasury.  The  Mayor  may,  of  his  own 
mere  will,  refuse  to  sign  warrants  for  the  payment  of  workmen 
legally  employed. 

In  either  case,  if  the  Department  is  anxious  for  the  dispatch 
of  the  work,  and  is  yet  unwilling  to  resort  to  the  slow  and  com- 
pulsory process  of  the  Courts,  they  are  obliged  to  yield  to  the 
demands  of  the  Mayor,  who  thus  obtains,  by  usurpation 
a  power  over  the  Department  which  the  law  never  intended 
to  give. 

INTERVIEWS    WITH    THE    MAYOK. 

With  these  preliminary  observations,  I  shall  give  you  a 
statement  of  my  official  intercourse  with  the  Mayor,  since  the 
first  of  January  last,  and  you  will  then  be  enabled  to  judge 
what  are  the  facts,  which,  with  odd  confusion  of  ideas,  he  de- 


nominates  "  serious  disagreements  "  and  "  insubordination,'7 
and  whether  they  constitute  a  cause  for  my  removal.  He  has 
not  sent  to  your  Board  any  statement  of  the  facts  upon  which 
he  relies  to  uphold  these  charges,  and  I  might,  therefore,  dis- 
miss them  with  the  above  remarks ;  but  I  prefer  to  give  the  fol- 
lowing account,  for  the  complete  understanding  of  the  whole 
subject,  and  to  enable  you  to  form  your  own  judgment  as  to 
the  real  motives  of  his  last  message. 

The  occasions  which  arose,  calling  for  official  intercourse 
between  the  Mayor  and  myself,  were  of  a  two-fold  character. 

First.  The  refusal  of  the  Mayor  to  sign  warrants  for  the 
payment  of  expenses  in  constructing  certain  public  works,  au- 
thorized by  the  Common  Council,  at  one  time  on  the  ground 
that  the  ordinances  were  illegal,  and  at  another  time  because 
he  did  not  like  our  plan  of  construction.  And 

Secondly.  An  attempt  to  coerce  the  Board  in  the  selection 
of  their  inspectors  of  work. 

It  is  provided  by  the  act  entitled  "  An  act  to  create  the 
Croton  Aqueduct  Department  in  the  city  of  New  York,  passed 
April  11,  1819,"  as  follows  : 

"  §  4.  The  Croton  Aqueduct  Board,  in  addition  to  the  matters  charged  upon 
them  by  the  said  amended  charter,  are  hereby  charged  -with  the  preservation  of 
the  Croton  lake  and  waters,  with  the  preservation  of  the  banks  of  the  Croton 
river  from  injury  or  nuisance,  with  the  execution  of  such  measures  as  may  be 
necessary  to  preserve  and  increase  the  quantity  of  water,  and  keep  it  pure,  with 
the  management,  preservation,  and  repairs  of  the  dam,  gates,  aqueduct,  high 
bridge,  reservoirs,  mains,  pipes,  pipe  yard,  and  property  of  every  description  be- 
longing to  the  water-works ;  and  they  shall  have  the  construction  of  such  new 
works,  and  the  purchase  and  laying  down  of  such  mains  and  pipes  as  the  Com- 
mon Council  may  authorize;  and  also  the  construction,  repairs,  and  cleansing  of 
all  the  sewers  and  underground  drains,  but  subject  to  the  orders  and  directions 
of  the  Common  Council,  as  to  the  times  and  places  of  building  new  sewers,  and 
to  the  general  plan  which  has  been  or  may  be  adopted  for  the  sewerage  and  drain- 
age of  said  city.  They  shall  be  responsible  for  the  supply  of  water,  and  the  good 
order  and  security  of  all  the  works,  from  the  Croton  lake  to  the  city,  inclusive ; 
for  the  exactness  and  durability  of  the  structures  which  may  be  erected,  and  of 
the  daily  work  to'be  performed ;  and  for  the  sufficiency  of  the  supply  in  the  pipe- 
yard  to  meet  every  casualty  ;  and  for  the  fidelity,  care,  and  attention  of  all  per- 
sons employed  by  the  department  in  watching  the  works  and  in  making  con- 
structions and  repairs;  and  shall  inspect  thoroughly  the  interior  of  the  aqueduct, 
and  make  the  necessary  repairs  at  least  twice  in  each  year." 

*  *  *  »  ***** 

"  §  7.  *  *  *  They  shall  appoint  and   employ  all  the 

clerks,  foremen,  mechanics,  keepers,  watchers,  laborers,  and  other  persons  whom 


37 

they  may  judge  to  be  necessary  for  the  performance  of  their  duties,  under  thi* 
act,  except  the  officers  and  clerks  in  the  bureau  of  the  Water  Register,  and  shall 
require  such  bonds  and  securities  as  they  may  deem  proper,  from  such  of  said 
officers  and  servants  as  they  shall  appoint." 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that,  by  law,  the  greatest  responsibili- 
ties are  cast  upon  the  Croton  Board,  and  that  consequently  the 
plans  of  wwk,  and  the  selection  of  agents  in  their  execution, 
are  confided  to  that  Board  exclusively. 

It  had  for  a  long  time  been  our  anxious  desire  to  increase, 
as  a  matter  of  public  necessity,  the  daily  flow  of  water  into  the 
city.  For  this  purpose,  it  was  absolutely  necessary  to  enlarge 
the  capacity  of  the  pipes  over  the  High  Bridge  and  between 
the  two  Reservoirs. 

To  accomplish  this  object  at  the  High  Bridge,  without,  at 
the  same  time  during  the  construction,  cutting  off  the  flow  of 
the  water  through  the  aqueduct,  is  a  very  delicate  operation  in 
engineering.  Certain  portions  of  the  work  could  be  done  very 
easily  by  contract,  but  other  portions  it  would  be  utterly  unsafe 
to  commit  to  any  contractor  whatever.  They  should  be  per- 
formed by  the  Board  under  the  direct  supervision  of  the  En- 
gineer and  his  assistants. 

To  ensure  this  necessary  control  over  the  portions  referred 
to,  we  asked  for,  and  obtained  from  the  Common  Council,  on 
the  31st  December  last,  an  ordinance  (passed  by  a  three-fourths 
vote,  as  required  by  law),  permitting  this  work  to  be  done  by 
the  day.  This  ordinance  or  resolution  was  signed  by  Mayor 
Tiemann. 

Early  in  the  current  year,  it  became  necessary,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  change  made  in  the  grade  of  Eighth  Avenue,  to 
lower  the  main  conduit-pipe  in  that  Avenue,  to  conform  to  the 
new  and  reduced  grade.  The  main  through  this  Avenue  sup- 
plies the  daily  wants  of  a  large  portion  of  the  western  part  of 
the  city.  To  strip  this  pipe,  excavate  a  trench  twelve  feet 
deep  below  it,  in  some  places  through  solid  rock,  and  to  lower 
the  pipe  to  the  bottom,  without  shutting  off  or  interrupting  the 
entire  flow  of  water  through  it,  for  even  one  minute,  was  also  a 
work  too  delicate  to  commit  to  the  hazards  of  a  contract.  There 
was  less  danger  here,  than  will  be  in  some  points  of  our  work  on 
High  Bridge,  but  still  there  was  sufficient  risk,  to  make  it  our 


duty  to  ask  for  permission  to  do  this  work  also  by  the  day.  A 
resolution  to  that  effect  was  passed  on  the  22dday  of  February, 
1860.  This  resolution  was  identical,  as  to  its  legality,  with  the 
one  passed  in  reference  to  the  High  Bridge.  This  was  signed 
on  the  28th  day  of  February  by  Mayor  Wood. 

On  or  about  the  13th  March,  1860,  both  these  works  were 
commenced,  and  after  considerable  progress  had  been  made, 
and  the  Comptroller  had  signed  the  warrants  for  the  payment 
of  the  workmen,  we  were  surprised  to  hear  that  the  Mayor 
refused  to  countersign  them. 

On  the  16th  May,  the  Croton  Board,  upon  my  motion, 
passed  the  following  resolution  : — 

"  Whereas,  a  question  has  "arisen  as  to  the  legality  of  the 
resolution  under  which  this  Board  is  now  proceeding  with  the 
improvements  at  the  High  Bridge,  and  the  lowering  the  main 
pipes  on  the  Eighth  Avenue  by  '  days'  work,'  instead  of  by 
contract, 

"fie$olved,  That  until  his  Honor  the  Mayor  decides  whether 
he  will  approve  of  the  prosecution  of  the  work  in  its  present 
form,  all  the  said  work  at  the  High  Bridge  and  Eighth  Avenue 
be  suspended." 

On  the  22d  May,  the  Board  sent  the  following  letter  to 
the  Mayor : 

"  CROTON  AQUEDUCT  DEP'T, 

Xew  York,  May  22,  1860. 
"  To  Hox.  FERNAXDO  WOOD,  Mayor,  <fce. : 

The  lowering  of  the  main  Croton-pipe  in  Eighth  Avenue  by  days'  work,  in 
obedience  to  a  resolution  of  the  Common  Council,  passed  February  28,  1860, 
having  been  suspended  on  the  16th  inst.,  in  consequence  of  some  doubts  ex- 
pressed by  your  Honor  as  to  the  legality  of  the  resolution  referred  to,  the  Cro- 
ton Aqueduct  Board  beg  leave  to  make  the  following  statement  and  inquiry. 

The  lowering  of  the  pipe  became  necessary,  as  your  Honor  has  already  been 
informed,  by  the  alteration  of  the  grade  in  the  said  Avenue.  The  lineal  distance 
for  which  the  pipe  must  be  lowered  is  about  the  third  of  a  mile  ;  the  maximum 
vertical  depth  to  which  it  must  be  depressed  to  conform  to  the  new  grade,  is 
about  twelve  feet 

The  daily  supply  of  the  western  portion  of  the  city  makes  it  necessary  that 
the  flow  through  this  pipe  be  entirely  uninterrupted.  To  lower  this  pipe,  thirty 
inches  in  diameter,  when  full  of  water,  even  one  foot  below  its  original  bed, 
without  breaking  a  joint,  or  without  other  accident,  could  not  with  any 
safety  be  done  by  contract.  To  lower  it  the  entire  distance  required,  (with- 
out drawing  off  the  water,)  by  contract,  would  involve  a  risk  amounting 
almost  to  a  certainty  of  an  accident,  against  the  disastrous  consequences  of 


•which,  no  amount  of  security  received  from  the  contractor  could  be  set  off  as 
a  compensation.  It  was  for  this  reason  alone,  that  the  Croton  Aqueduct 
Board  asked  that  such  work  should  be  under  the  'absolute  control  of  the 
Engineer  supervising  it,  so  that  he  could  at  any  moment  either  decrease  or 
increase  the  extent  of  his  operations,  or  stop  the  work  altogether,  as  the  exigen- 
•  cies  of  the  moment  might  make  necessary,  without  being  influenced,  as  would  be 
a  contractor,  by  the  desire,  for  pecuniary  reasons,  to  drive  the  work  to  the 
utmost  verge  of  safety. 

It  was  for  these  reasons  alone  that  the  Croton  Board  asked  for  the  authority 
to  do  the  work  otherwise  than  by  contract. 

When  our  operations  were  suspended,  the  pipe  had  already  been  stripped  of 
its  covering,  a  large  portion  of  the  new  bed  on  the  lower  grade  prepared  by 
excavation,  <fec.,  and  the  pipe  supported  above  it  by  the  screws  and  other  appur- 
tenances necessary  for  the  lowering.  The  process  of  lowering  had  also  been 
commenced.  The  pipe  now  stands  on  temporary  supports,  at  some  distance 
above  the  surface  of  the  Avenue  ;  and  although  every  precaution  and  care  have 
been  taken  to  render  it  secure  and  prevent  any  accident,  it  is  by  no  means  in  a 
position  of  absolute  safety. 

We  would  further  beg  leave  to  say,  that  in  the  contract  made  by  the  Street 
Commissioner  for  grading  said  Avenue,  a  specified  time  was  reserved,  during 
which  this  Department  should  have  a  right  to  the  possession  of  this  portion  of 
the  Avenue,  for  the  purpose  of  lowering  the  pipe.  No  more  of  that  time  now 
remains  to  us  than  is  necessary  for  the  work  we  have  to  perform. 

Under  these  circumstances,  we  have  deemed  it  our  duty  to  make  this  state- 
ment, and  to  ask   whether  in  your   opinion  the  necessity   of  the  case  requires 
that  the  work  in  question  should  be  resumed,  and  whether  in  the  event  of  its 
resumption,  you  will  sign  the  warrants  for  the  money  required  in  its  prosecution^ 
Very  respectfully, 

Your  obedient  servant, 
(For  the  Board.)  THOS.  STEPHENS,  President." 

On  the  23d  May,  a  letter  was  received  from  the  Major  in 
reference  to  the  work  on  the  8th  Avenue,  as  follows, — 

MAYOR'S  OFFICE, 

New  York,  May  23,  1860. 
"  THOMAS  STEPHENS,  ESQ  ,  PRES'T  CROTOX  AQUEDUCT  DEP'T. 

Sre, — In  reply  to  the  communication  from  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Department 
of  the  22d  in st.,  I  beg  leave  respectfully  to  say,  that  for  the  reasons  stated — as 
well  as  that  in  my  judgment  the  proposed  lowering  of  the  main  Croton  pipe  in 
Eighth  Avenue  by  days'  work,  does  not  conflict  with  the  city  charter — I  have  no 
objection  to  the  renewal  of  that  work  forthwith. 

Very  respectfully, 

FERNANDO  WOOD,  Mayor." 

On  the  31st  May  the  Board  again  addressed  to  the  Mayor 
another  urgent  request  to  countersign  the  warrants  for  the 
High  Bridge,  as  follows, — 


40 

CROTOX  AQUM>CCT  DKP'T, 

May  81,  1860. 
"  To  His  HONOR,  FERNANDO  WOOD,  Mayor,  <kc. : 

SIR, — The  work  which  was  in  progress  for  the  improvement  of  the  High 
Bridge  was  suspended  at  the  same  time  the  operations  in  lowering  the  main 
pipe  in  8th  Avenue  were  suspended,  and  for  the  same  reason,  viz.,  the  question 
raised  as  to  the  legality  of  the  resolution  under  which  we  were  acting. 

This  resolution  was  passed  by  the  last  Common  Council,  on  a  representation 
by  this  Board  of  the  great  risk  which  would  be  incurred  in  doing  the  necessary 
work  by  contract.  The  great  mass  of  the  materials  to  be  supplied,  and  a  large 
portion  of  the  mechanical  part  of  the  work  can  be  done  by  contract ;  but  a  part 
of  it  cannot  be  so  done,  without  danger  as  imminent  as  that  set  forth  in  our  com- 
munication to  you  as  to  the  work  on  8th  Avenue,  dated  May  22d.  Should  an 
accident  occur  on  High  Bridge,  the  supply  of  water  would  be  cut  off,  not  solely 
from  a  portion  of  our  streets,  but  from  the  entire  city. 

Under  these  circumstances  we  beg  leave  to  set  before  you  this  urgent  expres- 
sion of  opinion  that,  so  far  as  the  safety  of  the  city  requires  it,  this  work  should 
be  done  by  the  day. 

This  embraces  but  a  very  small  portion  of  the  entire  work,  and  we  beg  to  ask 
whether,  in  view  of  the  necessity,  which  urged  our  Board  to  ask  for  the  resolution 
above  referred  to,  you  will  countersign  the  requisitions  drawn  for  such  expenses 
as  may  be  incurred  in  prosecuting  otherwise  than  by  contract,  such  portions  of 
the  work  as,  in  the  judgment  of  this  Board,  it  is  utterly  unsafe  to  allow  to  be 
doae  by  contract  Very  respectfully, 

Your  ob't  servants,  dec. " 


It  will  thus  be  seen  that  down  to  the  date  of  this  letter,  the 
Mayor  had  undertaken  to  determine  (as  in  the  case  of  Corn- 
well  and  Conboy),  whom  we  should  retain  in  our  employment, 
and  whom  we  should  dismiss,  and  (as  in  the  case  of  the  High 
Bridge  and  that  of  the  8th  Avenue)  what  work  we  should  do 
and  what  work  we  should  not  do  ;  although  both  involved  the 
same  points  of  legality.  All  these  questions  were,  as  I  have 
shown,  placed,  by  the  law,  exclusively  within  the  jurisdiction 
of  our  Board.  We  were,  however,  compelled  to  submit,  be- 
cause, without  money  to  pay  the  men,  no  work  could  be  done. 

But  the  Mayor  made  further  demands ;  he  notified  the  Board 
that  he  required  that  all  Inspectors  appointed  by  us  should  be 
sworn  before  him  at  his  office.  This  course  was  unusual,  had 
never  before  been  adopted,  and  was  not  required  by  the  Act  of 
1849; — but  wishing  to  interpose  no  objection,  so  far  as  the 
mere  ministerial  administration  of  the  oath  was  concerned,  we 
directed  the  Inspectors  to  attend  upon  him  for  that  purpose. 


41 

About  this  time — the  last  week  in  May — the  rumor  pre- 
vailed in  the  city  and  in  the  public  prints  that  the  Mayor  in- 
tended to  remove  all  the  Heads  of  Departments,  myself  in- 
cluded. 

When  I  heard  the  rumors  I  called  upon  him,  and  for  rea- 
sons which  will  suggest  themselves  to  your  minds,  I  beg  leave 
to  state  our  conversations  somewhat  minutely. 

I  told  him  frankly,  that  perhaps  iny  calling  might  be  con- 
sidered rather  abrupt  under  the  circumstances,  but  as  I  was 
generally  in  the  habit  of  going  at  my  object  in  a  straightfor- 
ward way,  I  could  not  help  doing  so  in  this  case.  First  telling 
him  what  I  had  heard,  I  said  that,  as  I  presumed  the  only  good 
grounds  for  removing  an  officer  were  either  the  want  of  ability 
or  fidelity,  and  as  I  had  been  nattered,  by  the  general  voice  of 
the  community,  into  the  belief  that  the  first  charge  would  not 
probably  be  the  one,  and  as  I  was  conscious  that  the  second 
could  not  possibly  be  brought  against  me,  I  presumed  he  must 
be  under  some  misapprehension  or  misinformation  in  regard  to 
facts,  and  I  therefore  called  to  ask  him  if  such  were  the  case, 
and  to  say  that  I  was  ready  to  answer  and  give  explanations 
upon  any  points  required. 

He  said  that  he  had  heard  of  nothing  and  knew  nothing 
against  me,*  and  had  not  yet  told  any  one  he  intended  to  re- 
move me.  I  told  him  that  my  object  was  not  to  ascertain  what 
he  had  told  any  one,  but  what  he  intended  to  do.  He  then 
said,  in  so  many  words,  that  he  had  not  arrived  at  his  present 
position  without  a  severe  struggle,  and  without  incurring  many 
obligations ;  and  that  his  object  in  removing  heads  of  Departments 
was  to  get  control  of  the  Departments,  so  that  he  could  put  in 
those  who  would  co-operate  icith  him,  and  also  could  pay  off  his 
obligations. 

•  Some  other  conversation  ensued,  which  was  mere  amplifica- 
tion of  this.  As  I  was  going  out,  the  Mayor  told  me  that  he 
had  not  yet  made  up  his  mind  what  he  would  do,  but  that  he 
would  not  act  at  all  in  my  case,  until  he  had  seen  me  again. 

*  Please  to  observe  that  this  interview  was  on  or  about  the  26th  of  May  • 
that  he  was  in  possession  of  the  facts  concerning  the  Reservoir  on  the  3d  of  May ; 
and  of  the  testimony  taken  in  reference  to  John  Cornwell  on  the  25th  February. 


42 

A  few  days  after  this  he  sent  for  me.  When  I  came  to  his 
office,  he  told  me  it  was  said  that  an  arrangement  had  been 
made  by  me  with  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  by  which  I  was 
guaranteed  my  place,  on  condition  that  they  should  have  all 
the  patronage.  I  replied  that  it  was  out  of  my  power  to  pre- 
vent such  calumny ;  and  that  no  friend  of  mine  would  believe 
me  capable  of  doing  anything  of  the  kind. 

He  said  it  was  an  Alderman  who  was  friendly  to  me  that  had 
made  the  statement  "  that  I  did  not  want  the  patronage,  and 
had  said  I  wished  it  were  in  my  power  to  get  clear  of  it."  I  an- 
swered, that  so  far  as  patronage^?'  se  was  concerned,  it  was  very 
true  that  I  did  not  want  it,  for  even  if  I  had  friends  to  provide  for, 
all  personal  feeling  would  be  entirely  secondary  to  my  duty  to 
the  public  as  Engineer,  which  required  me  to  select  foremen 
for  their  merits  alone ;  that  the  pressure  of  politicians  upon 
me  in  behalf  of  their  friends  was  so  great  for  every  place,  how- 
ever insignificant,  that  the  selection  of  inspectors  was  one  of 
the  most  wearing  and  unsatisfactory  labors  of  my  office ;  and 
that,  if  I  could  do  so  conscientiously,  I  would  willingly  let  Alder- 
men or  any  other  person  select  for  me  ;  but  that,  while  I  was 
willing  and  anxious  to  accommodate  the  Common  Council  by 
the  employment  of  their  friends  to  the  utmost  of  my  power, 
my  regard  for  my  professional  reputation,  and  for  my  duty, 
would  always  forbid  my  yielding  to  any  one  uncontrolled 
power  to  appoint  inspectors  over  work  for  which  I  was  solely 
responsible. 

That  I  never  had,  and  never  should,  forget  myself  so  far 
as  to  make  any  such  agreement  with  any  body  of  men,  or  with 
any  single  man — that  strong  as  was  my  desire  to  retain  my  po- 
sition until  the  Reservoir  was  finished,  (it  being  a  work  which 
could  not  but  prove  a  great  credit,  professionally  and  publicly, 
to  all  who  were  engaged  upon  it,)  the  desire  was  not  so  strong 
as  to  make  ine  forget  my  duty  as  a  man  and  an  officer,  and 
that  I  would  not  hold  my  place  at  the  expense  of  any  such 
breach  of  trust  as  that  implied  in  his  remarks.  The  conver- 
sation then  ended,  and  I  withdrew. 

A  few  days  after  this  interview,  I  was  informed  that  the 
Mayor  refused  to  swear  in  an  inspector  whom  the  Croton 
Board  had  appointed  to  supervise  the  construction  of  a  sewer 


43 

in  the  6th  Avenue,  between  50th  and  51st  streets,  by  con- 
tract. 

This  refusal  made  it  quite  evident  that  the  order  of  the 
Mayor  before  mentioned,  requiring  all  Inspectors  to  be  sworn 
before  him,  was  intended  to  include  something  more  than  the 
mere  ministerial  administration  of  the  oath  ;  yet  we  submitted. 

On  the  2d  of  June,  1860,  the  subject  of  this  refusal,  and  the 
continued  suspension  of  the  work  at  the  High  Bridge,  came 
under  the  consideration  of  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Board ;  which, 
on  my  motion,  adopted  the  two  following  resolutions  : 

(Extract  from  minutes  Croton  Board.) 

"  Resolved,  That  J.  J.  Noble  be  suspended  until  the  Mayor  shall  have  time  to 
investigate  certain  charges  alleged  against  him. 

"  Resolved,  That  a  communication  be  sent  to  the  Mayor,  stating  the  necessity 
for  going  on  with  the  work  at  High  Bridge,  and  asking  whether  he  will  counter- 
sign the  warrants  therefor." 

On  the  ninth  day  of  June,  the  Mayor  sent  to  our  Board  the 
following  letter,  exculpating  the  Inspector  : 

MAYOR'S  OFFICE, 
New  York,  June  9, 1860. 
"  I  am  satisfied  that  the  charges  against  J.  J.  Noble  are  unfounded. 

FERNANDO  WOOD." 

At  the  time  this  letter  was  received,  I  was  absent,  owing 
to  illness,  but  I  am  informed  by  my  colleagues  that  Noble  was 
sent  back  again  to  the  sewer  on  which  he  was  first  appointed ; 
but  that  the  Mayor  refusing  to  recognize  him  on  that  sewer,  he 
was  again  withdrawn. 

On  the  20th  June,  the  Board  again  addressed  another  let- 
ter to  the  Mayor  in  regard  to  the  High  Bridge,  as  follows, — 

CROTON  AQUEDUCT  DEPARTMENT. 

June  20th,  I860. 
"  To  His  HONOR  FERNANDO  WOOD,  Mayor,  <fec. : 

Sir, — The  Croton  Aqueduct  Board  beg  leave  respectfully  to  call  your  atten- 
tion to  their  communication  of  May  31st,  i-elative  to  the  proposed  improvement 
of  High  Bridge. 

Copies  of  opinions  of  the  Corporation  Counsel,  given  in  reply  to  a  question 
submitted  by  one  of  the  Committees  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  and  also  to  a 
question  submitted  by  this  Board,  are  herewith  furnished ;  the  points  involved 
being  similar  to  those  raised  in  the  matter  above  referred  to. 

The  work  of  enlargement  on  High  Bridge  was  authorized  to  be  done  by  days< 
work  on  the  31st  day  of  December,  1859. 


44 

^  The  work  preparatory  to  the  construction  of  a  new  pipe  was  commenced  on 
the  13th  day  of  March,  1860.  The  work  was  suspended,  at  the  request  of  the 
Mayor  and  by  order  of  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Board,  on  the  16th  May,  1860. 
The  gravel  covering  of  the  Bridge  and  pipes  had  at  that  time  been  removed,  and 
the  dry  wall  around  the  Gate-house  on  the  Manhattan  side  had  been  taken  up, 
preparatory  to  making  a  connection  with  the. Gate-house. 

The  Bridge  is  now,  and  has  been  since  operations  on  it  were  suspended,  in 
this  exposed  condition,  and  it  is  most  important-  that  some  definite  conclusion  in 
regard  to  it  should  be  arrived  at,  without  further  delay. 

If  the  work  is  to  be  abandoned,  the  covering  mass  and  material  which  has 
been  removed  from  the  pipes  and  masonry  should  be  replaced  as  a  protection 
If  it  is  to  be  prosecuted,  no  time  is  to  be  lost  The  delay  already  experienced 
will  make  it  necessary  to  cover  with  a  temporary  roof,  extending  the  whole 
length  of  the  Bridge,  work,  which  must  now  be  unavoidably  left  unfinished. 
Further  delay  will  render  it  impossible  to  get  our  pipe-work  in  such  a  state  of 
forwardness  as  to  be  available  during  the  coming  winter.  During  the  cold 
weather  of  last  winter,  the  water  in  the  lower  Reservoir  was  reduced  to  so  low 
an  ebb,  as  to  create  serious  apprehensions  of  the  result  of  any  large  fire  which 
might  have  occurred  at  the  time.  During  the  coming  season  the  increased  pop- 
ulation of  the  city  will  superinduce  an  increased  consumption  o  f  water,  and  the 
difficulties  and  risks  heretofore  encountered  will  be  proportionably  magnified, 
unless  the  proposed  improvements  be  completed.  These  improvements  are  the 
enlargement  at  the  High  Bridge,  and  the  additional  connection  by  a  four-foot 
pipe  between  the  Receiving  and  Distributing  Reservoirs.  Both  these  works  are 
now  suspended,  and  we  beg  leave  to  report  that  some  action  should  be  taken  at 
once,  if  the  surplus  water  now  running  waste  at  the  north  end  of  the  High 
Bridge,  is  to  be  made  available  for  the  comfort  and  safety  of  our  citizens  and 
their  property. 

The  greater  part  of  the  work  at  both  the  points  above  named,  can  be  done 
by  contract;  but  inasmuch  as  certain  parts  of  it  cannot  with  safety  be  done 
otherwise  than  by  days'  work,  application  was  made  to  the  Common  Council, 
which  resulted  in  the  ordinances  above  referred  to.  Should  you  decide  thai, 
under  the  circumstances,  you  will  sign  the  warrants  necessary  for  the  payments 
on  the  work,  we  can  go  on,  and  yet  be  prepared  for  the  coming  winter.  If  not, 
and  we  are  thrown  upon  the  delays  and  dangers  of  the  contract  system,  the  dif- 
ficulties may  be  very  serious.  The  Board  feel  satisfied  that  a  personal  inspection 
of  the  site  of  the  proposed  work,  would  aid  in  the  removal  of  the  objections 
expressed  by  your  Honor,  and  they  will  be  happy,  if  opportunity  be  afforded 
them,  to  accompany  your  Honor  to  the  same,  at  any  time  you  will  be  pleased  to 
name  as  consistent  with  your  other  engagements. 

Very  respectfully, 

Your  obed't  servants, 

THOS.  STEPHENS, 
THOS.  B.  TAPPEX, 
A.  W.  CRAVEN. 

Croton  Aqueduct  Board." 


45 

On  the  28th  June,  having  received  no  reply  from  the 
Mayor,  I  called  upon  him  at  his  office,  when  the  following  con- 
versation occurred : — 

,  I  asked  him  if  he  had  yet  made  up  his  mind  whether  he 
would  countersign  the  warrants  for  the  payments  on  the  work, 
and  told  him  that,  as  had  been  fully  set  forth  in  pur  two  com- 
munications to  him,  dated  May  31  and  June  20th,  the  necessity 
for  some  action  on  the  subject  was  absolute  and  immediate. 

He  answered  that  he  had  made  up  his  mind  not  to  sign  the 
warrants.  I  asked  him  if  he  would  notify  our  Board  in  writing 
of  his  determination,  and  he  said  lie  would  do  so  the  next  day. 
I  then  observed  that  he  was  assuming  the  responsibility  of  de- 
laying a  work,  the  immediate  progress  of  which  was  most  im- 
portant to  the  city,  both  as  to  comfort  and  to  safety.  He  said 
he  should  be  governed  by  his  own  judgment  in  that  respect, 
and  added  that  his  reason  for  opposing  the  work  was  that  he 
did  not  like  the  plan.  He  did  not  state  in  what  respect,  nor  did 
I  ask  him.  I  answered  that  with  all  due  deference  to  him,  that 
the  plan  was  a  matter  committed  by  the  Legislature  to  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Croton  Aqueduct  Board.  He  asked  if  I  meant  to 
say  that  he  had  no  right  to  any  opinion,  or  no  right  to  super- 
vise the  Departments.  I  answered  that  as  chief  magistrate  he 
had  not  only  a  right,  but  that  it  was  his  duty  to  inquire  into 
the  manner  of  conducting  business  in  all  the  Departments,  and 
to  check  any  dishonesty  or  impropriety  of  conduct,  if  he  found 
it ;  but  that  in  all  matters  which,  by  the  charter,  were  exclusively 
placed  under  the  control  of  the  different  departments,  as  to  spe- 
cifications and  plans,  he  most  surely  could  claim  no  prohibit- 
ory voice ;  and  particularly  in  a  matter  of  engineering  science 
connected  with  the  Croton  Aqueduct,  he  was  not  the  officer 
legally  appointed  to  decide  ;  and  that  he  could  not  properly 
make  his  opinion  a  good  ground  for  stopping  a  work  of  such 
pressing  importance,  and  in  regard  to  the  plans  of  which,  the 
proper  Department  had  fully  decided.  He  said  he  should  un- 
dertake it.  I  then  repeated  my  request  for  his  decision  in 
writing,  and  he  repeated  his  promise  to  let  us  have  it  without 
delay.* 

*He  has  not  done  so  to  this  day. 


46 

I  then  spoke  to  him  about  the  Inspector  on  the  sewer 
in  6th  avenue,  whom  he  had  refused  to  recognize  because  of 
certain  charges  alleged  against  him  by  the  contractor  on  said 
sewer,  which  charges  he,  the  Mayor,  had,  in  writing,  notified 
our  Board  were  unfounded.  He  said  he  would  recognize  him 
on  any  other  sewer  than  the  one  for  which  he  had  been  appoint- 
ed. I  then  urged  upon  him,  that  if  a  contractor  could  select 
his  own  Inspector,  and  oe  upheld  by  the  Mayor  in  doing  so, 
there  would  be  little  use  in  appointing  Inspectors  at  all ;  that 
such  a  course  would  establish  a  precedent  entirely  subversive 
of  all  power  to  have  public  work  done  with  any  degree  of  hon- 
esty, or  fidelity  to  the  city.  As  he  would  not  be  changed  by 
any  arguments,  I  withdrew. 

On  the  6th  of  July,  I  offered,  at  the  meeting  of  the  Croton 
Board,  the  following  preamble  and  resolution  : — 

"  Whereas,  On  the  3d  of  May  last,  an  Inspector  was  selected  by  this  Board  to 
superintend  the  sewer  about  to  be  constructed  in  Sixth  Avenue  between  Fiftieth 
and  Fifty -first  Streets  ;  and 

Whereas,  His  Honor  the  Mayor  (who  had  already  claimed  that  all  inspectors 
under  this  Department  should  be  sworn  in  by  him)  refused  to  swear  in  said  In 
spector,  in  consequence  of  certain  charges  which  he  stated  had  been  alleged 
against  him ;  and 

Whereas,  On  motion  of  A.  W.  Craven,  Chief  Engineer,  said  Inspector  was  sus- 
pended from  the  work,  in  order  to  give  his  Honor  the  Mayor  an  opportunity  of 
investigating  the  said  charges,  and  the  Mayor  was  advised  of  said  suspension;  and 

WJtereas,  By  a  letter  dated  June  9th,  the  Mayor  informed  this  Board  that 
the  charges  against  said  Inspector  were  disproven,  but  notwithstanding  said  let- 
ter and  said  exculpation,  his  Honor  still  refused  to  swear  him  in,  giving  to  said 
Inspector,  as  a  reason  for  such  refusal,  that  he  had  promised  the  contractor  on 
said  work  not  to  do  so ; 

And  Whereas,  acquiescence  in  such  a  reason  for  the  dismissal  of  any  Inspector, 
would  lead  to  a  total  subversion  of  the  ability  of  this  Board  to  have  any  of  the 
work  committed  to  its  charge  performed  honestly,  and  according  to  the  contract 
made  in  behalf  of  the  parties  to  be  assessed  ;  therefore 

Resolved,  That  said  Inspector  be  re-appointed  on  said  sewer  in  Sixth  Avenue, 
between  Fiftieth  and  Fifty-first  Street,  according  to  the  original  selection  of  this 
Board ;  said  appointment  being  by  virtue  of  the  authority  given  by  the  charter 
to  this  Department,  to  appoint  Inspectors  on  all  work  for  the  faithful  performance 
of  which  this  Department  is  by  the  same  charter  alone  held  responsible. 

On  the  llth  July  he  sent  his  first  message  to  the  Board  of 
Aldermen,  removing  me  from  office  for  "  serious  disagree- 
ments" and  •'  insubordination." 


47 

On  the  18th  July  he  sent  a  second  message,  removing  me 
for  additional  reasons,  which  I  have  stated  and  examined  in  the 
first  part  of  this  answer. 

And  yon,  and  my  fellow  citizens  at  large,  will  probably  be 
surprised  to  learn,  that  though  I  have  been  at  all  times  ready 
and  willing  to  make  the  statement  and  explanations  I  have 
now  presented  to  you,  and  although  the  alleged  reasons  of  the 
Mayor  contain  the  most  serious  charges  against  my  character, 
both  personal  and  professional,  yet  that  the  Mayor  never  allu- 
ded to  them  in  any  of  my  interviews  with  him,  nor  did  I  ever 
hear  of  them  until  I  read  Ms  charges  in  the  newspapers  which 
carried  them  into  all  parts  of  the  United  States. 

CONCLUSION. 

I  dismiss  this  subject  to  your  final  determination,  with  a 
brief  statement  of  the  conclusions  clearly  deducible  from  the 
facts. 

1st.  It  is  not  true  that  I  have  made  any  "  changes  "  what- 
ever in  "  the  plan  "  of  the  Eeservoir,  either  "  extensive  "  or 
"  peculiar,"  or  otherwise.  No  work  has  been  done,  or  is  con- 
templated upon  the  Reservoir  except  such  as  is  specifically  men- 
tioned and  provided  for  in  the  contract,  and  at  pieces  therein 
limited. 

2d.  It  is  true  that  there  are  variations  in  the  quantities  of 
work  and  materials,  as  originally  estimated,  and  as  actually  to 
be  done. 

3d.  It  is  not  true  that  these  variations  are  "  remarkable," 
except  in  one  sense,  that,  considering  the  vastness  of  the  area, 
and  the  impossibility  of  making  an  exact  and  subterranean 
estimate,  they  are  "  remarkable  "  in  presenting  comparatively 
so  slight  a  difference. 

The  area  is  106.  acres,  presenting  an  irregular  surface  of 
rocks  and  morass,  the  rocky  hillocks  rising  in  some  places 
thirty-five  feet  above  the  swamps  in  the  same  area. 

The  depth  of  our  excavation  exceeded,  in  some  places, 
forty  feet. 


48 

The  estimate  was  of  necessity  made  before  the  surface  was 
broken  for  the  work,  and  the  quantities,  and  particularly  the 
qualities  of  the  various  earths  and  rocks  to  be  found  beneath 
the  surface  were,  as  every  engineer  knows,  and  as  I  have  ex- 
plained to  you,  matters  more  or  less  of  uncertainty. 

4th.  It  is  true  that  for  these  variations,  requiring  additional 
work  and  materials,  the  contractors  will  be  entitled  to  some 
$100,000  beyond  their  bid  of  $632,743,  which  was  based  on 
the  quantities  and  qualities  stated  in  the  estimate ;  but  it  is 
not  true  that  the  cost  to  the  city  will  be  increased  that  amount 
beyond  my  estimate  of  the  cost,  made  for  the  use  of  the  Gov- 
ernment. Such  estimate  was  (exclusive  of  the  gate-houses) 
$1,025,000.  The  Eeservoir  will  be  built  for  $150,000  less,  at 
least ;  probably  much  lower. 

5th.  It  is  not  true  that  in  "every  case"  in  which  these 
variations  have  occurred,  "they  have  proved  very  beneficial  to 
the  contractors."  On  the  contrary,  several  of  them  are  done 
at  prices  which  indicate  a  loss,  and  the  others  are  done  at 
prices  barely  remunerative,  and  which  a  majority  of  the  com- 
petitors were  not  willing  to  do  for  fifty  per  cent,  advance. 

6th.  It  is  not  true  that  I  made  any  "  mistake  "  in  the  award 
of  the  contract. 

I.  /  did  not  make  the  award  :  it  was  made  by  Messrs.  Van 
Schaick,  De  Forrest,  myself  (as  the  Croton  Board),  and  the 
Hon.  A.  C.  Flagg,  the  Comptroller,  unanimously.     Fairchild 
&  Co.,  to  whom  the  a*vard  was  made,  were  the  lowest  bidders. 

II.  Even  had  I  alone  made  the  award,  it  was  made  stinctty 
according  to  the  requirements  of  the  charter;  there  was  no 
mistake  in  any  one  point  of  the  letting . 

I  may  be  excused  from  saying  here,  that  notwithstanding 
the  difficulty  attendant  upon  explanations  on  professional  sub- 
jects, I  have  clearly  shown  that  the  charges  of  the  Mayor  which 
were  set  forth  with  such  minute  detail  of  figures  and  items,  are 
utterly  unfounded  when  examined  in  the  light  of  intelligence 


49 

and  truth.  In  the  whole  conduct  of  the  work  on  the  Reservoir, 
from  the  first  examination  of  its  site  until  the  present  moment, 
that  course  lias  been  adopted,  and  those  precautions  taken, 
which  the  experienced  and  skillful  men  in  my  profession  would, 
under  similar  circumstances,  suggest  and  advise ;  and  1  hope 
YOU  will  be  as  much  surprised  as  my  professional  brethren  are, 
that  the  very  facts  which  I  would  invoke  as  evidence  of  capac- 
ity, integrity,  and  judgment,  are  perversely  distorted  so  as  to 
assume,  to  the  eye  of  those  who  do  not  understand  the  subject, 
the  aspect  of  folly,  ignorance,  or  something  worse. 

In  providing,  by  numerous  specifications,  for  contingencies 
dependent  upon  the  developments  of  our  operations,  and  in 
availing  myself  of  those  provisions,  I  have  done  only  what  was 
absolutely  required  by  my  duty  as  an  officer,  to  ensure  the 
perfection  of  the  Reservoir.  Had  I  done  otherwise,  I  could 
not  have,  as  now,  the  right  to  hope  that  with  this  great  public 
work  my  name  may  hereafter  be  honorably  associated. 

7th.  It  is  not  true  that  the  paving  in  Forty-ninth  street  was 
executed  without  "  proper  vigilance  "  on  my  part.  The  "Water 
Purveyor,  charged  by.  law  with  such  work,  examined  and 
passed  it.  The  Croton  Board,  the  Board  of  Assessors,  the 
Board  of  Aldermen,  and  the  Board  of  Council  men  confirmed 
it.  Against  the  unanimous  action  of  these  five  separate  bodies, 
there  is  no  evidence  but  the  unsworn  statement  of  nine  prop- 
erty-holders, interested  to  defeat  the  assessment  for  the  work. 

8th.  It  is  true  that  an  error  of  eight  inches,  in  the  maximum, 
was  made  in  the  grade  of  a  sewer  in  Fortieth  street ;  but  it  is 
not  true  that  the  error  was  made  by  me,  or  that  I  am  respon- 
sible for  it,  or  that  the  city  will  suffer  any  loss  by  it.  The  er- 
ror was  made  by  a  city  surveyor,  appointed  by  the  Common 
Council,  and  will  simply  involve  the  additional  charge  by  the 
contractor  for  extra  excavation,  averaging  four  inches  in 
depth,  for  a,  limited  distance. 

9th.  It  is  not  true  that  any  of  the  men  in  our  department 
have  been  guilty  of  the  fraud  of  converting  the  public  property 
to  their  own  use,  or  that  we  have  retained  any  such  men  in 
our  employment. 

4 


50 

Some  discharged  laborers  got  up  a  prosecution  against 
Cornwell,  a  foreman  of  a  gang  (employed  by  us  for  eleven 
years  with  entire  satisfaction),  charging  him  with  gross  offences. 
We  examined  witnesses  patiently  for  four  days,  and  the  entire 
Board,  Messrs. Yan  Schaick,  Tappen,  and  myself,  unanimously 
dismissed  the  charge.  We  were  the  proper  tribunal  before 
which  to  try  the  case,  and  we  did  try  it  thoroughly  and  honestly. 
This  the  Mayor  has  in  effect  admitted  ;  for  since  the  explana- 
tions given  him,  he  has  signed  the  warrants  for  the  payment  of 
Cornwell  and  Conboy  semi-monthly,  up  to  the  present  time. 

So  much  for  the  second  message.     Now  for  the  first. 

10th.  It  is  not  true  that  there  have  been  any  <;  disagree- 
ments," serious  or  otherwise,  between  the  Mayor  and  myself. 
Such  a  state  of  facts  is  simply  impossible  ;  because,  by  law,  in 
the  discharge  of  our  respective  duties,  there  is  no  one  subject 
upon  which  it  is  necessary  that  we  should  agree. 

llth.  It  is  not  true  that  I  have  been  guilty  of  "  insubordi- 
nation" to  him.  I  am  an  Engineer,  charged  with  the  respon- 
sibility of  the  plan  and  execution  of  public  work  requiring  skill 
and  science.  He  is  a  layman,  and  the  law  is  not  guilty  of  the 
absurdity  of  making  me  "  subordinate  "  to  him  in  the  discharge 
of  my  duty.  On  the  contrary,  the  act  of  1819,  organizing  the 
Department,  imposed  upon  me  a  personal  responsibility,  and 
makes  my  decision,  within  the  sphere  of  my  jurisdiction,  final 
and  exclusive. 

12th.  But  it  is  true  that  after  his  repeated  attempts  to  usurp 
the  power  of  the  Department,  and  to  make  it  the  slave  of  his 
will,  I  have  raised  those  objections  which  I  was  legally  entitled 
to  interpose,  and  which  are  demanded  of  me  by  every  consid- 
eration of  fidelity,  to  the  city. 

By  abusing  the  power  confided  to  him  of  countersigning 
the  warrants  of  the  Comptroller  for  the  pay  of  our  men  ;  grant- 
ing or  refusing  his  signature  at  pleasure  ;  he  has  undertaken 
to  say  whom  we  shall  retain  in  our  employment,  and  whom  we 
shall  not — whom  we  shall  select  as  Inspectors,  and  whom  we  shall 
not — and  what  wor'Jc,  authorized  l»j  law  and  the  ordinances,  we 
shall  execute  or  omit. 


51 

He  has  arrested  the  execution  of  two  very  important  public 
works,  in  the  very  height  of  their  progress  ;  and,  by  his  action 
on  one  of  them,  defeated  or  delayed  the  long  cherished  desire 
of  the  Department  to  increase  the  supply  of  water.  One  of 
these  works,  that  on  Eighth  avenue,  was  in  course  of  execu- 
tion under  an  ordinance  of  the'  Common  Council,  signed  ly 
himself;  and  the  other,  that  on  the  High  Bridge,  under  an 
ordinance  signed  by  his  predecessor.  Both  of  these  were  sus- 
pended upon  his  asserted  doubts  of  their  legality.  He  with- 
draws his  objection  to  the  first  and  least  important  of  the  two, 
and  grants  us  his  permission  to  proceed. 

He  refuses  his  permission  to  the  latter,  involving  the  same 
point  of  legality,  and  starts  an  objection  to  the  plan  of  the 
work — a  matter  wholly  within  the  province  of  our  Board,  and 
wholly  upon  my  responsibility. 

Fur  the  sake  of  not  having  any  important  public  work  de- 
layed, I  have  never,  for  one  moment,  stood  upon  the  question 
of  subordination  ;  but  have  yielded  in  every  point  until  it 
came  to  a  question  involving  my  fidelity  as  an  officer.  He 
refused  to  countersign  the  warrant  for  the  pay  of  an  In- 
spector whom  we  had  appointed  upon  a  sewer,  upon  the 
ground  that  he  had  promised  not  to  do  so,  at  the  request 
of  the  contractor  whose  work  the  Inspector  was  to  super- 
vise— expressing  his  willingness  to  recognize  such  Inspector 
upon  any  other  sewer.  I  immediately  introduced  resolutions 
into  our  Board,  pledging  my  colleagues  to  resist  these  usurpa- 
tions ;  and  within  five  days  afterward  he  sent  to  the  Board  of 
Aldermen  his  first  message,  proposing  to  remove  me  for 
11  serious  disagreements  and  insubordination." 

Respectfully  submitted. 

A.  W.  CRAVEN, 
Chief  Engineer  Croton  Aqueduct  Department. 


52 


City  and  County  of  New  York,  ss  : 

Alfred  W.  Craven,  of  said  City,  being  duly  sworn,  says 
that  tlie  foregoing  answer  is  true  to  the  knowledge  of  this  de- 
ponent, excepting  that  part  of  it  which  refers  to  the  instrumen- 
tal examinations  of  the  assistant  Engineers  of  this  deponent, 
and  as  to  those  matters,  deponent  believes  it  to  be  true. 

A.   W.   CRAVEN. 

Sworn    to  before    me,    this  let.  ) 
day  of  September,  1860.       \ 

EDWARDS    PIEEREPONT, 

Justice  Superior   Court. 


THE  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 

Santa  Barbara 


THIS  BOOK  IS  DUE  ON  THE  LAST  DATE 
STAMPED  BELOW. 


Series  9482 


UC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

AA      000118485    2 


